No. Natural Law is the laws in Science known to be true that we follow to create any and all scientific ideas -- both literal and hypothetical -- by using maths.

One of the Natural Laws is Gravitation.

you keep saying gravitation without defining what you mean

gravity

sounds really freaky when you say gravitation

!mute @ส็็็Oddballส

"the force that attracts a body towards the centre of the earth, or towards any other physical body having mass."

In a basic definition

Theory.

No, Law. It's a law: Universal Gravitation.

"A law stating that any two masses attract each other with a force equal to a constant (constant of gravitation) multiplied by the product of the two masses and divided by the square of the distance between them." (www.dictionary.com, 2019)

i do not believe this has been demonstrated or is the cause of things falling

i have never observed 2 masses attracting oneanother

...I'm sorry?

So you're arguing with the Natural Laws of the world now?

It's bold.

Do you not believe in math?

You can argue that the theory of relativity doesn't exist because it was the attempt at defining what Gravity is or was correctly; however, Universal Gravitation is a mathematical law.

The rate is not a cause

@chad46 have you ever observed two magnets attracting each other?

is that what you mean by 2 masses?

no, i mean two magnets

so whats the connection

There isn't, that was a weird statement to make.

Ive seen magnets repel

Maybe he had an antigravity theory to share

if you've seen two magnets attract, what is the cause

@Amthyric plz do not force your religion onto others

i dont care, what has that to do with gravity

i'm showing you a flaw in yoru logic

ok show it then

i'll take it you HAVE seen two magnets attract

ok well i have seen two masses attract, when i drop a bowlling ball

so youre going to make something up and say thats my logic?

i see it move towards the mass of the ground

My magnets repel

Now what

Elctron-phonon coupling

Would be the answer.

why not use what ive actually said to prove my logic is bad