Message from @MR VLAK
Discord ID: 477146577996349443
no. it does not explain or attempt to explain rotation of planets only orbiting of planets
Furthermore, gravity theory suggests that the planets have been moving in orderly orbits for millions and millions of years, which wholly contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Ever heard of the Law of Entropy?
I hope we can get past the definitions of theories and laws in science. I am looking into your last comment, give me a moment I cant remember all the laws etc
@MR VLAK And that experiment" together with your explanation really doesn't prove anything. If you balance and counter-balance things on a floppy tape-measure of course things will re-balance itself.
Its not a floppy tape, its a wood ruler. The only thing that is moved is the large mass at one point that never touched the ruler
So "The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time. The total entropy can remain constant in ideal cases where the system is in a steady state (equilibrium), or is undergoing a reversible process."
how does this relate to the solar system in your opinion?
187) The second law of thermodynamics, otherwise known as the law of entropy, along with the fundamental principles of friction/resistance determine the impossibility of Earth being a uniformly spinning ball. Over time, the spinning ball Earth would experience measurable amounts of drag constantly slowing the spin and lengthening the amount of hours per day. As not the slightest such change has ever been observed in all of recorded history it is absurd to assume the Earth has ever moved an inch.
Law of entropy - everything degrades over time.
you noted the lack of drag when objects fell in a vacuum right?
Could you please refer me to the scientific journal where your WOOD ruler experiment was published for peer-review?
@MR VLAK And where are you located btw? I'm up for going to the dam this coming weekend or the next if you would like? Who wants to join us?
@Deejay from Earth I am in Kzn
That's cool I'll drive through if you can suggest a six mile stretch of water anywhere nearby?
@MR VLAK Oh it's much better to see the evidence for yourself, first hand. I don't mind the drive - I drive a lot anyways. What dams are there in KZN?
i could not share all the sources as Discord has a text limit
What dam is closest to you?
Cool.
Jozini seem the most sensible
@MR VLAK Why has Cavendish never been repeated and why isn't there one of these alleged devices in every classroom?
@MR VLAK Why isn't there a gyroscope to prove and experiment with the spin of the earth in every classroom?
@MR VLAK Why isn't there even a basic telescope in every science classroom?
because they can do it with a lader, ruler and a few masses
And I am now done with you selectively answering my questions.
Telescope and Gyroscope i cannot answer
its the cavendish experiment... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Transactions_of_the_Royal_Society
Cavendish, H. 'Experiments to determine the Density of the Earth', Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, (part II) 88 p.469-526 (21 June 1798), reprinted in Cavendish 1798
No that is a book.
what peer review happened in 17th century lets be honest
How about the last 100 or so years ago? Repeated and published?
I don't think scientists spend much time on items they learn in school and can repeat anytime they have a ladder, some string, ruler and weights. But I am speculating here
Also your entire model is still based on the assumption that the earth rotates. That still hasen't changed, regardless of how many links you post. You are wasting time with BS Strawman arguments and vague irrelevant bullshit.
no my model is based on the fact that masses are pulled to each other, this explains gravity and why solar objects orbit. Then gravity explains how water can be around a sphere
Then demonstrate how gravity sticks around a ball WITH AN EXPERIMENT.
proving the earth moves is irrelevant to me in proving the earth is a sphere