Why physicists are determined to prove Galileo and Einstein wrong

Cab

Jan 24, 2020
2
2
5
Sorry--Galileo was wrong. Heavy objects fall to earth faster than lighter objects even in a perfect vacuum. And Galileo's experiment was theoretically flawed. He dropped two objects--they would fall even faster than each object separately. You smart guys probably understand why. But if you don't, here's a thought experiment: Drop a bowling ball and measure the elapsed time. Now drop the Sun.
 
Last edited:
Dec 3, 2019
8
4
35
Shouldn't these boffins be engaged in more productive and useful scientific pursuits, such as looking for a practical solution for climate change that doesn't rely on the selfish human nature to do it? If they don't, within a hundred years, all scientific research may become obsolete.
 
Jan 25, 2020
1
1
15
Sorry--Galileo was wrong. Heavy objects fall to earth faster than lighter objects even in a perfect vacuum. And Galileo's experiment was theoretically flawed. He dropped two objects--they would fall even faster than each object separately. You smart guys probably understand why. But if you don't, here's a thought experiment: Drop a bowling ball and measure the elapsed time. Now drop the Sun.
Are you out of your mind? Science rhetoric has seriously made your gears smoke from over thinking. You can't drop the the sun on earth. You could drop the earth on the sun. You don't have to be a genius to drop two objects that have differing masses to know that they will both hit the ground at the same time (given that they were actually dropped at the same time.) The earth has a nearly constant gravitational pull making everything fall at the same rate of 9.8 m/s squared. This means that if you take a pound of rock, or 10 pounds of rock they WILL fall at the same rate. If something the size of a planet were to be dropped onto something the size of a star you would be dealing with two differing gravitational pulls. Meaning, objects don't fall at the same rate on earth as they do on the sun. If you dropped a 10lb weight on earth and timed it. It would differ from the same weight dropped on mars because the gravitational pulls differ. And you would have to account for atmospheric drag and other outside forces. Going back to your comment, "even in a perfect vacuum", you cant achieve a perfect vacuum on earth because you can only "vacuum as high as the highest barometric pressure of the the environment. On earth the highest achievable vacuum is equivalent to the highest atmospheric pressure which is around 28.92 inches of mercury. Galileo was more intelligent than us and im sure he would be able to school us on logic any day of the week. But , he didn't know or understand what the people of today would be and i don't blieve was wrong because he didn't factor in a few hundred yeats of new knowledge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heath51
Jan 25, 2020
1
1
0
Shouldn't these boffins be engaged in more productive and useful scientific pursuits, such as looking for a practical solution for climate change that doesn't rely on the selfish human nature to do it? If they don't, within a hundred years, all scientific research may become obsolete.
Your statement shows you have absolutely no idea how the weather works, and totally ignores the fact that the climate has been changing for nearly 4.5 billion years, most of it by far without the help of the "selfish human."
Get a grip moron!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truthseeker007

Urquiola

BANNED
Jan 18, 2020
38
2
55
Physicists dropped objects on a satellite for two years to test Galileo's theory of falling objects.

Why physicists are determined to prove Galileo and Einstein wrong : Read more
I'd say the Space Station experiment had inherent design drawbacks that make it unconclusive. First, besides gravity, drag acts on the speed an object falls, this may not have been detected by Galileo, but with instruments accurate enough, it will show; about the Space experiment, Platinum and Titanium do have different densities, 21450 kg/m3 vs 4507 kg/m3; weight per volume (Wikipedia), two cylinders of same size will differ in weight, and gravity forces are connected to weight, thus, if the cylinders are of different weight, gravity forces will differ, if same weight, size will differ, drag won't be same, also drag changes with object's shape. Perhaps in absolute empty no drag difference will exist, but: Is there any 'absolute'? The darkest space has some atoms, some photons sparsed, if the time of movement is long enough, drag differences will show. ????
 
Last edited:
Jan 25, 2020
2
3
15
Shouldn't these boffins be engaged in more productive and useful scientific pursuits, such as looking for a practical solution for climate change that doesn't rely on the selfish human nature to do it? If they don't, within a hundred years, all scientific research may become obsolete.
Boffins. I never heard that before. Thanks. It sounds disrespectful, but it's not. Anyway, no. Not those particular people. It's like asking a butcher if he shouldn't be doing carpentry because you think carpentry is more useful to humanity than supplying meat for meat eaters.
 
Jan 3, 2020
152
11
605
Sorry--Galileo was wrong. Heavy objects fall to earth faster than lighter objects even in a perfect vacuum. And Galileo's experiment was theoretically flawed. He dropped two objects--they would fall even faster than each object separately. You smart guys probably understand why. But if you don't, here's a thought experiment: Drop a bowling ball and measure the elapsed time. Now drop the Sun.
Galileo has been right this far - see the article - and that has nothing to do with intelligence but observation - see the article. By the way, Sun and other stars are "dropped" all the time as they move in space, moving accordingly to general relativity as far as we can tell.
 
Jan 3, 2020
152
11
605
Shouldn't these boffins be engaged in more productive and useful scientific pursuits, such as looking for a practical solution for climate change that doesn't rely on the selfish human nature to do it? If they don't, within a hundred years, all scientific research may become obsolete.
Scientists are not "boffins" as you can see by statistics - most are engaged in many things - and climate science is one of those. Science thrives on mutual research, see how space science helps gravity science.

And what about yourself? Shouldn't you support science - such as climate science - since it was it that discovered man made global warming in the first place?
 
Jan 3, 2020
152
11
605
Your statement shows you have absolutely no idea how the weather works, and totally ignores the fact that the climate has been changing for nearly 4.5 billion years, most of it by far without the help of the "selfish human."
Get a grip moron!
And if you confuse weather and climate, your statement show you have absolutely no idea of how climate works, or why this year's World Economic Forum had five (5!) climate risks as the top risks for world economy. It became cheaper to combat man made global warming - the problem is its speed of change, never seen before - a few years ago. So man up.
 
Jan 3, 2020
152
11
605
I'd say the Space Station experiment had inherent design drawbacks that make it unconclusive.
It was the very elimination of drag and residual 60 % weight at low Earth orbit altitudes - by free fall - to best effort that was the point of the apparently conclusive (thus far) experiment design. If such effects had remained and been influential, it would have shown up.

If you can show that there were problems in peer reviewed publication, so much the better. "Satellitespeed"! 😉
 
Jan 25, 2020
2
0
10
Are you out of your mind? Science rhetoric has seriously made your gears smoke from over thinking. You can't drop the the sun on earth. You could drop the earth on the sun.
Hi, you got baited.
actually no you cant drop the earth on the sun either. ?! >Both< would "fall" toward their barycenter.

If you looked at drop the earth on the sun from the >>>>>non inertial frame<<<<< of reference of the sun, the earth would fall(fall == move towards) faster than dropping Mercury. Because in an inertial frame of reference the Sun would "drop" further toward the earth.

Similarly in the non inertial frame of the earth. When you drop a 2kg Brick the earth moves further faster towards that barycenter than when you drop a 1kg one. So in the non inertial frame of the earth the 2kg brick "falls"(approaches) faster than in the different non inertial from of an earth when a kg brick is dropped.

By similar gotcha logic....
Bricks also fall "faster" (approach the floor(of the lift)) in lifts that are accelerating upwards.

The overt clue was when he said
"You smart guys probably understand why. But if you don't, here's a thought experiment: Drop a bowling ball and measure the elapsed time. Now drop the Sun. "

basically not science, gamesmanship.
 

PGJ

Jan 26, 2020
1
0
0
Sorry--Galileo was wrong. Heavy objects fall to earth faster than lighter objects even in a perfect vacuum. And Galileo's experiment was theoretically flawed. He dropped two objects--they would fall even faster than each object separately. You smart guys probably understand why. But if you don't, here's a thought experiment: Drop a bowling ball and measure the elapsed time. Now drop the Sun.
This is hilarious . It certainly would be an interesting experiment to conduct inside a satellite. It would also be a few orders of magnitude different to free-falling blocks of elements. I would't want to be the guy holding the sun as it were dropped from a great height though. Would needs some serious oven gloves and a very powerful sunscreen. I'm not sure what would happen if the sun were dropped from height onto some other super massive star or black hole, but I do suspect that that at that scale there would be many other forces in place and probably not what the scientists had in mind.
 

Cab

Jan 24, 2020
2
2
5
Are you out of your mind? Science rhetoric has seriously made your gears smoke from over thinking. You can't drop the the sun on earth. You could drop the earth on the sun. You don't have to be a genius to drop two objects that have differing masses to know that they will both hit the ground at the same time (given that they were actually dropped at the same time.) The earth has a nearly constant gravitational pull making everything fall at the same rate of 9.8 m/s squared. This means that if you take a pound of rock, or 10 pounds of rock they WILL fall at the same rate. If something the size of a planet were to be dropped onto something the size of a star you would be dealing with two differing gravitational pulls. Meaning, objects don't fall at the same rate on earth as they do on the sun. If you dropped a 10lb weight on earth and timed it. It would differ from the same weight dropped on mars because the gravitational pulls differ. And you would have to account for atmospheric drag and other outside forces. Going back to your comment, "even in a perfect vacuum", you cant achieve a perfect vacuum on earth because you can only "vacuum as high as the highest barometric pressure of the the environment. On earth the highest achievable vacuum is equivalent to the highest atmospheric pressure which is around 28.92 inches of mercury. Galileo was more intelligent than us and im sure he would be able to school us on logic any day of the week. But , he didn't know or understand what the people of today would be and i don't blieve was wrong because he didn't factor in a few hundred yeats of new knowledge.
@Heath51: I am sure you are aware that the acceleration of a falling object has two components: a) The acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the earth on the object and b) The acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the object on the earth. Component a) is well known and constant but b) is proportional to the mass of the object. Yes, component b) was minute for the objects that Galileo dropped. Theoretically, had Galileo possessed fine instruments and wanted to verify Newton, he would have had to drop each object separately and measure the elapsed time because a 10 lb. ball and a 1 lb. ball dropped together would both fall at the speed of an 11 lb. ball, wouldn't they?.
- Heavy objects fall faster than lighter objects.
- Yes, Heath51, I believe in Galileo.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see the other posts, sorry my response is late: This is neither gamesmanship nor baiting. The statement that all objects fall to earth at the same speed, even in a vacuum, is just plain FALSE. We do not measure the two components. I am amazed and disappointed that even legitimate physics texts, even written by legitimate physics professors, would state, without reservation, that speed of fall is independent of mass.
 
Jan 27, 2020
3
0
10
Boffins. I never heard that before. Thanks. It sounds disrespectful, but it's not. Anyway, no. Not those particular people. It's like asking a butcher if he shouldn't be doing carpentry because you think carpentry is more useful to humanity than supplying meat for meat eaters.
Boffins is a word we used years ago, basically for anyone in science, council decision makers, etc. It was never meant as in any way derogatory, just a "collective" name for some clever people.
I have used the word for years and still do.
Think of it as a "nick Name."
 
Jan 25, 2020
2
0
10
@Heath51: I am sure you are aware that the acceleration of a falling object has two components: a) The acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the earth on the object and b) The acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the object on the earth. Component a) is well known and constant but b) is proportional to the mass of the object. Yes, component b) was minute for the objects that Galileo dropped. Theoretically, had Galileo possessed fine instruments and wanted to verify Newton, he would have had to drop each object separately and measure the elapsed time because a 10 lb. ball and a 1 lb. ball dropped together would both fall at the speed of an 11 lb. ball, wouldn't they?.
- Heavy objects fall faster than lighter objects.
- Yes, Heath51, I believe in Galileo.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see the other posts, sorry my response is late: This is neither gamesmanship nor baiting. The statement that all objects fall to earth at the same speed, even in a vacuum, is just plain FALSE. We do not measure the two components. I am amazed and disappointed that even legitimate physics texts, even written by legitimate physics professors, would state, without reservation, that speed of fall is independent of mass.
well ifs not those then its wrong
Fg =G M1 M2 / R^2 << no two forces at all.
// nope: Heavy objects fall faster than lighter objects.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyeF-_QPSbk
 
Jan 27, 2020
1
1
0
If a hydrogen atom and a lead atom are released simultaneously (in a sea of gravitons) then they fall at the same speed.
But if the same atoms (through a strand of gravitons) are quantum entangled, the second changes after manipulation of the first instantaneous.
So with free fall of atoms in a sea of gravitons there is a different, slow interaction between atoms and gravitons than with instantaneous gravitons quantum entanglement between atoms
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truthseeker007
Jan 6, 2020
163
58
180
Today is Taco Tuesday (every Tuesday is Taco Tuesday). The problem with Tacos is that you can make them with different fillings depending on your taste buds. When dealing with complex problems one has to create an image and reverse engineer to arrive at a cogent solution. Which is the best Taco in the world? Without careful observations and culinary skills, one could not arrive at the hypothesis of which Taco is the best.
Since the article was about whether Gallio and Einstein were correct in their assumptions that objects fall at a constant rate. They were correct; the difference is in nano seconds. So, the theory of Relativity stands pat but now you have a difference between classical physics and quantum physics which gets weird on how things are supposed to react within the conservation laws of the Standard models.
This experiment had to do in part with Astro physics if you create an explosion the energy going forth is spherical in nature. Does the force of the explosion entropy because of gravity or other forces in play? Does gravity act as a force boson, a Z with the W’s plus or minus. Is gravity a combination of both can it have a zero mass and when excited, go either side of the W’s.
The question has been posed, is the universe expanding? Why doesn’t gravity constrain that momentum, or does it just keeps going. Is gravity a constant or is it localized between two objects? Time then becomes spherical in shape instead of linear, because time is simply the interaction if two objects and their motion in relation to each other.
Now climate people are like eating a Taco which one is the best? Have you ever watched the National Weather service when they are forecasting a hurricane? There are many different models out there that will tell you what course the hurricane is going to take. Through careful behavioral modification and statistical algorithms, you can convince a multitude of people that you have the best Taco and serve it up to the multitudes who do not take the time to reduce things to a simplistic state.
Just for the climate people how do you explain the magnetic shift from true North traveling to the west at 50 miles per year. What effect does that have on the Gamma rays and ultraviolet rays that hit the earth ever day? How does that affect the weather patterns? How does the thermal vents in the deep oceans spewing CO2 affect the climate? How does the ebb and flow of the elliptical orbit of the earth on a yearly basis affect the climate? Climate control is a misnomer no one in history has been able to control the climate. Man is the only one that wants to control others. Nature has its own exact laws of conservation.
Some great answers from some young people. For others their idea of a great Taco is what the waiter tells them, and they follow along with others at the table.
Me I like a simple Taco then figure out the complexities and the variables involved in trying to make the world's best Taco. It takes a dose of common sense and logic put in a fry pan and reduce it down to its simplest cogent thought.
Enjoy Taco Tuesday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truthseeker007
Dec 26, 2019
218
53
130
Today is Taco Tuesday (every Tuesday is Taco Tuesday). The problem with Tacos is that you can make them with different fillings depending on your taste buds. When dealing with complex problems one has to create an image and reverse engineer to arrive at a cogent solution. Which is the best Taco in the world? Without careful observations and culinary skills, one could not arrive at the hypothesis of which Taco is the best.
Since the article was about whether Gallio and Einstein were correct in their assumptions that objects fall at a constant rate. They were correct; the difference is in nano seconds. So, the theory of Relativity stands pat but now you have a difference between classical physics and quantum physics which gets weird on how things are supposed to react within the conservation laws of the Standard models.
This experiment had to do in part with Astro physics if you create an explosion the energy going forth is spherical in nature. Does the force of the explosion entropy because of gravity or other forces in play? Does gravity act as a force boson, a Z with the W’s plus or minus. Is gravity a combination of both can it have a zero mass and when excited, go either side of the W’s.
The question has been posed, is the universe expanding? Why doesn’t gravity constrain that momentum, or does it just keeps going. Is gravity a constant or is it localized between two objects? Time then becomes spherical in shape instead of linear, because time is simply the interaction if two objects and their motion in relation to each other.
Now climate people are like eating a Taco which one is the best? Have you ever watched the National Weather service when they are forecasting a hurricane? There are many different models out there that will tell you what course the hurricane is going to take. Through careful behavioral modification and statistical algorithms, you can convince a multitude of people that you have the best Taco and serve it up to the multitudes who do not take the time to reduce things to a simplistic state.
Just for the climate people how do you explain the magnetic shift from true North traveling to the west at 50 miles per year. What effect does that have on the Gamma rays and ultraviolet rays that hit the earth ever day? How does that affect the weather patterns? How does the thermal vents in the deep oceans spewing CO2 affect the climate? How does the ebb and flow of the elliptical orbit of the earth on a yearly basis affect the climate? Climate control is a misnomer no one in history has been able to control the climate. Man is the only one that wants to control others. Nature has its own exact laws of conservation.
Some great answers from some young people. For others their idea of a great Taco is what the waiter tells them, and they follow along with others at the table.
Me I like a simple Taco then figure out the complexities and the variables involved in trying to make the world's best Taco. It takes a dose of common sense and logic put in a fry pan and reduce it down to its simplest cogent thought.
Enjoy Taco Tuesday.
I agree mostly. However with Geoengineering they are doing just that. Trying to control the climate. It looks like they started even before the 60s. It is known they can manipulate the weather also. You can find that in just a quick research about it. And I don't think they are trying to control the climate for the betterment of humans. More about control.
 
Feb 6, 2020
5
1
30
Galileo was right and wrong. Gravity affects all objects at the same rate. but some objects have higher air resistance making them fall slower. Einstein's general relativity is right but not his cosmology constant. As for why people want to prove them wrong well everyone likes finding mistakes in other peoples homework.
 
Dec 3, 2019
8
4
35
Scientists are not "boffins" as you can see by statistics - most are engaged in many things - and climate science is one of those. Science thrives on mutual research, see how space science helps gravity science.

And what about yourself? Shouldn't you support science - such as climate science - since it was it that discovered man made global warming in the first place?
Misinterpreting my post as not supporting science or climatology can be done only by professional idiots, i.e. people who are so absorbed in their own job or field of study that they don't fully comprehend the larger ramifications of their activity. Of course, it can also be a result of a simple reading comprehension deficiency.
 
Dec 3, 2019
8
4
35
Boffins. I never heard that before. Thanks. It sounds disrespectful, but it's not. Anyway, no. Not those particular people. It's like asking a butcher if he shouldn't be doing carpentry because you think carpentry is more useful to humanity than supplying meat for meat eaters.
It's a word I picked up from colloquial British English. However, your comparison/parallel is false. We're dealing with humankind's priorities here. If you think that finding the unifying physical theory of the universe is more important than finding solutions for critical issues facing humanity to ensure continuation of such research in the future, then neither your research nor humanity will survive.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts