More correctly, accelerates

this here? http://prntscr.com/npr2ou is funny shit lmao <:lul:484994724118134784>

None of that is a problem

Why?

That's what the term is defined as in science

It's not the same as the colloquial usage

The term theory when used in general speech is closer to the scientific term "hypothesis"

@Fading What I meant was that I think we don't yet fully know why mass creates gravity wells/bend space time.

Well of course. It'd be nice if it was the Higgs Boson, but who knows

Or the higgs field

But electromagnetism as a cause can be ruled out im fairly confident

Well yeah lol, gravity is far stronger

weaker*

rather

What am I saying

EEG machines should attract all objects, not just metal if electromagnetism was the case

GRAVITY is far stronger than the electromagnetic forces

Yes

I need to stop drinking lmao

😂

Has anyone ever thought that gravity was electromagnetism? I can't see a reason to think that tbh

It's 2:20 pm here, just woke up

Mike says so

And alot of other people here

Their similarity is they... both follow the inverse square law? Which is just a consequence of acting spherically lmao

Yeah, but try to tell that to them

I'm just trying to imagine what would make someone explain gravity via electromagnetism

I can't understand why everything else tends to spherical, except the earth

Well I mean at least some are consistent, the majority seem to disbelieve gravity behaves as though attracted toward point masses (aka spherical behaviour)

And if you say mass attracts mass they keep asking what is mass 😂

It'd be nice if we knew that lol

Is "an inherent property" not sufficient?

Yeah or a bundle of particles

There are too many things in all different flat models that are wrong

Not particles, I mean atoms

Can't have a bundle of light after all

Wait

Wat in the fcuk am I saying

Light is waves, that can act like particles also, that's better

Quantum theory is fun like that

Yeah, double slit