Message from @Drewski4343
Discord ID: 646403413088665613
Or big enough
or, say, a longer cylinder.
Why not
but then logically, the sphere would have to be so big that all of it would be affected at the same rate
and that still doesn't explain how it would have formed
the earth being infinitely big makes no sense
though, according to mainstream science, a cylinder can't form that way.
true
The "attraction" of mass to a central point is uniform in all directions, so particulate would naturally accumulate in a sphere.
or, roughly sphere-shaped. Beyond a certain mass, though, the mass is dense enough to continually "fall" inwards, collapsing further into a sphere.
I read up on mountains and gravity and, apparently, mountains actually lose half their height by around 20 millions years.
*well then*
it's not science. has never been observed. cannot be replicated. not testable
it's just a supposition
we still don't even know what causes gravity
in 2019
ergo we can't replicate it
tune it
to test it in the lab
the fundamental cause is still unknown
right
that's all it is
no data to support
what seems to cause it is the mass of the object. The idea is that it warps the fabric of spacetime, distorting the path of other objects
that's how gravity works
LOL
uh
ok
it's still just a theory
there is no space
every scientific observation has been used to create theories
but it's a theory. space time is a concept
they're all theories
it's not based on NO evidence, though. Mountains do shrink over time.
obviously
exactly
it's based of observable evidence and calculations
so it's not just "rubbish"
yes. it's rubbish. it's not science
you can't say something's not true by repeating that it's a theory