i don’t blame you, its how this society is taught

🤔

How was that a word salad

Your claim was wrong since you're using a term incorrectly. If you really want to deny that by saying that I just want to feel smart then be my guest.

it doesn’t matter how you describe what gravity is, the original discussion was about whether or not gravity can exist on another model of the earth. the textbook definition of gravity is irrelevant in that context, which is why your posts are semantic word salad

i described you perfectly, thank you very much

Kek

Except it does matter what gravity is since that's how you can even determine if it works on a flat earth

How you describe gravity is crucial as to whether or not it works on flat earth in the first place

@everyone

in essence, what you, and what others like you do, is that when someone calls you a “poopyhead” you say “WELL ACKSHUALLY MY HEAD ISN’T MADE OF POOP” and miss the point. You’re going on this meta rant because you already know this theoretical concept can work on both

but i hope you feel smart

most people come here to satisfy their pride so i’d hate to rain on your parade

this is actually a debate that seems to cause issues

whether the word "gravity" refers to theories like einstein's and newtons, or if it refers to the observed fact that things fall

But... it can't?

You continually claim I'm missing the point but you're the one whose using ignorant of what gravity is described as in the globe model. This ignorance is leading to a false claim.

I’m sure you’ll get to the point eventually

I'm just stating that your description of gravity is inaccurate if you believe it to be compatible with the flat earth, which you've claimed.

you pseuds do love your self-satisfying buildup

look at him stroke that e-peen

what's wrong with constant downwards acceleration?

let him twist his nipples a little more first

Ah yes, you've got no real argument so you turn to ad homs. Should've expected that.

@raspberry if you're going to cite gravity then it's as a theory.

still waiting for your argument that you have written an essay building up to

if gravityis a downward force... why does a Helium balloon rise?

sure, i'm fine with either, it's just that people have used both and confuse them in the past @Shadow✓

My argument is that your claim is wrong because your idea of gravity is wrong. Not that hard to see.

The helium balloon displaces an amount of air (just like the empty bottle displaces an amount of water). As long as the weight of the helium plus the balloon fabric is lighter than the air it displaces, the balloon will float in the air. It turns out that helium is a lot lighter than air.

Basically, gravity pulls harder on the denser object, so the lighter one “floats”.

@raspberry if you call gravity the actual phenomena of objects falling that's rather incorrect. Since usually gravity is described as the explanation and cause for the observation.

i thought that that gravity was a DOWNWARD FORCE? why doesnt the helium go down then?

:/

relative density and buoyancy are consequences of things falling imo

here, since you’ve completely missed the socratic challenge i have presented and have chosen instead to focus on my comment which should be irrelevant to the discussion, let me help you. “Gravity cannot work on anything but a sphere because...”

its because gravity isnt real at all DENSITY is the effect you are looking at

@Shadow✓ i usually use it the way you do too. other globers tho have mixed it up, and this caused a huge debate on another server

@raspberry I honestly think that's ignorance more than anything. In physics at least gravity is usually reffering to the cause.

@A Search for Roche's Rifle things can fall without a need for gravity

ofc they can