Retarded Theory

[Ashendant]

i saw someone posting this retarded theory, that he saw on mmo-champion forums

Proving Newton Wrong – Gravity is a Fictitious Force
By Michael Heydenrych

The goal of this text is to prove the following two equations (1) and (2) leads to an inconsistency, and is thus false. Gravity and mass are fictitious.
(1)... F = m . a (Newton’s second law)
(2)... F = ( G . m1 . m2 ) / d2 (Newton’s law of Gravitation attraction) (G=6.67428 x 10-11)

“Second law: A body of mass m subject to a force F undergoes an acceleration a that has the same direction as the force and a magnitude that is directly proportional to the force and inversely proportional to the mass, i.e., F = ma. Alternatively, the total force applied on a body is equal to the time derivative of linear momentum of the body.”

The Theory
Let’s start with the existing theory, and then highlight the problems.
Let’s take a golf ball of mass (mg) and the tennis ball of mass (mt) as the two objects, and let’s place them exactly 1 meter apart. Note: we do not know the values of mg and mt yet.
Thus, out of (2) we have:
Fgt = ( G . mg . mt) / (1)2
= ( G . mg . mt )
= (6.67428 x 10-11 . mg . mt) ...... (3)
What does this tell us? ...Absolutely nothing yet. We don’t know the mg, nor do we know mt.
But surely we can weigh the golf ball and the tennis ball? Yes, we can - ON EARTH. The formula for weight is given by (1) which requires knowledge of the gravitational acceleration of the earth (ae.) Upon weighing the golf ball on earth we find its weight to be Wge, and the weight of the tennis ball Wte. (Note: Wge and Wte are known quantities that we got from measuring them...on earth, and they are both non-zero otherwise you could not have measured them in the first place.)
Thus we have:
Wge = mg . ae  Wge / ae = mg ...... (4)
Wte = mt . ae  Wte / ae = mt ...... (5)

Substituting (4) and (5) into (3) we get:
Fgt = (6.67428 x 10-11 . (Wge / ae) . (Wte / ae))
= (6.67428 x 10-11 . Wge . Wte) / ae2 ...... (6)
Now we can easily solve for Fgt if we know the gravitational acceleration of the earth (ae.)
FORTUNATELY for Newtonian science ae is DEFINED to be a certain value.
“Standard gravity, or standard acceleration due to free fall, usually denoted by g0 or gn, is the nominal acceleration of body in a vacuum near the surface of the earth. It is defined to be precisely 9.80665 m/s2 (~32.174 ft/s2).” - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_gravity
ae = 9.80665 m/s2 ...... (7)
Substituting (7) into (6) we find the magnitude of the gravitational force between the golf ball and the tennis ball to be:
Fgt = (6.67428 x 10-11 . Wge . Wte) / (9.80665) 2 = some known, computable value. ..... (8)
(Note: Fgt is always non-zero, because Wge and Wte are both non-zero. Thus Fgt != 0.)
That is the theory. I also believed this theory without question until this morning, 23 December 2010 at 1:00.
The Problems
Study what I have written; verify that it is indeed what you believe. Are there any problems with the theory or the mathematics behind it?
Let’s start with the mathematics. Is it sound? The answer is no. In particular, look at equation (4) and (5). Did you know Einstein flunked math... repeatedly. You see, any successful mathematician knows that you cannot divide by an unknown quantity unless you know it can never be zero. Division by zero is undefined, and should you forget this basic mathematical principal then you can “prove” anything. I can “prove” that 1 + 1 = 1 which you, and I, know is incorrect. Let me do it:
Define a = 1 and b = 1
Thus,
a = b (obviously)
a2 = b2 (If the values are equal then their cubes must be equal)
a2 – b2 = b2 – b2 (Subtract b2 from both sides of the equality)
a2 – b2 = 0
(a – b)(a + b) = 0 ( (a-b)(a + b) = a(a + b) – b(a + b) = a2 + ab – ba – b2 = a2 – b2)
(a – b)(a + b) / (a – b) = 0 / (a – b) (Divide both sides of the equality by (a-b)) ****
a + b = 0
1 + 1 = 0 (because a and b are defined as 1)
2 = 0
1 = 0 (divide both sides by 2)
1 + 1 = 0 + 1 (add 1 to both sides of the equality.)
1 + 1 = 1 (Ta da. I can prove anything I want)
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY INCORRECT. The problem is the line where I divide both sides by (a-b). I can only do that if I know that (a-b) is not zero. a and b are defined to be 1, thus (a-b) = (1-1) = 0. I am not allowed to do that. I broke the rules, and got the weird results because of it. That is EXACTLY what Newton did - he broke the rules.
What I am trying to show is that if you do not adhere to the laws of mathematics then you will be able to prove anything you want, even false statements. Let’s go back to equation (4) and (5) and see if there is a problem. In equation (4) and (5) we divide by ae. Are we allowed to do that? Yes, but only if we KNOW ae is not zero. Is it non-zero? Well yes, they have defined it to be 9.80665 m/s2, which is obviously not 0. But WHO OR WHAT EXACTLY gave them the permission to define ae as non-zero? It’s not measured, nor calculated. It’s conveniently defined. If I wanted to, I could define it as being equal to 1 m/s2 and the math will still work out correctly - I’d have to adjust the value of the constant G to fit my contrived mathematical exercise, but that’s a minor hindrance. What if the theory is a hoax and that there exists no non-zero value of ae? Then ae must be zero, and subsequently the equations cannot be solved, and hence, untrue.
The Scary Part – The Proof
So who gave them permission to define ae to be 9.80665 m/s2? And WHY do we need the presence of the earth to prove anything? Equation (2) must hold for any two bodies in the universe with or without the presence of any other bodies in the universe. So, remove the Earth, and the Sun, and moon, and you, and me, and every other thing except for the exact same golf ball and the exact same tennis ball. Now, go ahead and try to prove equations (1) and (2). Do it. I dare you. The end result must be precisely the same as (8) IF AND ONLY IF the theory is correct.
I know you are lazy, and will rather take the word of “brilliant scientists” (cough) rather than go and prove it for yourself. So I’ll do it for you.
So now we have the exact same golf ball and the exact same tennis ball, at the exact same distance, and nothing else in the universe.
Let me restate the equations so far:
F = m . a ......(1)
Fgt = (6.67428 x 10-11 . mg . mt) ...... (3)

So we need to compute the value for mg and mt. How do we do that? Well, when we had the Earth we could weigh the balls, and using equation (1) solve for mg and mt. So let’s try and do the same:
Let’s start with the golf ball:
Wg? = mg . a?
What the HELL is a?? The gravitational acceleration towards WHAT? There is nothing else in the universe besides the golf ball and the tennis ball. We have removed everything. So it must be the gravitational acceleration towards either the golf ball (ag) or the gravitational acceleration towards the tennis ball (at). Neither of which are known values. Thus both are unknown quantities that can very easily be zero. Recall how I “proved” false statements by dividing by zero?
Thus we cannot calculate mg because that requires that we divide Wg? by a quantity that can be zero no matter whether we choose ag or at. This is not mathematically sound. Thus, invalid.
For argument’s sake, lets choose ag for the golf ball, and at for the tennis ball. It doesn’t matter. You can choose ag for both, at for both, or any combination that suits you – it all leads to the same problem. Substitute the masses in (2):
F = G . (Wg? / ag) . (Wt? / at) / (1)2 (We can’t do this, because ag and at could be zero. This equation is thus mathematically unsound, and we cannot continue.)
Another Scary part – Mass falls away
Let’s take the exact same golf ball. Remove the Earth, the sun, the moon, you and me and everything else INCLUDING the tennis ball. If mass existed, then what is the mass (mg) of the golf ball?
Well, from (1) we get:
F = mg . a
What exactly is “a”? Well, since the golf ball is the only thing in existence, we have no other choice other than using the gravitational acceleration towards the center of mass of the golf ball itself – which is zero.
F = mg . 0
Thus, F = 0
Notice how mg fell away and that the force F is 0. Thus mg cannot be calculated because it’s no longer even IN THE EQUATION, meaning mg is a fictitious quantity. It doesn’t exist. You can pick any value for mg it doesn’t matter. Not one bit. In particular, I can pick mg = 0. So the mass of the golf ball is zero, but on earth, the exact same golf ball’s mass is mg = Wge / ae which is non-zero, because Wge and ae are both non-zero. Thus we have a mathematical inconsistency where mg is zero and non-zero at the same time. Hence (1) and (2) lead to an inconsistency, and hence are UNTRUE.


Bye bye Newton.
Bye bye Einstein.
Bye bye Mass.
Bye bye Big Bang.
Bye bye:
F = m.a (Law of motion)
F = G . m1 . m2 / d2 (Gravity)
E = m . c2 (Relativity and the big bang and the speed of light!!!!)
And any other equation that MENTIONS any form of mass or gravity, or speed of light, density, etc. God, through me, proved that the equations are irrefutably incorrect and hence no argument can be held containing any mention of them.
That includes distances to the planets and sun, sizes of planets and sun, pretty much everything you THINK you know about space.
*** IMPORTANT ***
Please note: I disproved Gravity and Newton’s law of motion. The obvious response will be that I am insane. Gravity must exist, otherwise how are we sticking to the Earth. That’s FACT: We are sticking to the Earth. That’s extremely easy to prove by any person on the Earth.
I am not countering that fact. In fact, I will give you what I believe is the true nature of the force keeping us on the earth. I haven’t had time to research the details of it so I am not going to present proof of what I say. The purpose of this document was to disprove gravitation and Newton’s law of motion, and I have accomplished that.
* This is my theory which I will later expand in a further paper *
I believe, without proof that the true force for the attraction we experience towards the earth is Electro-magnetism. I believe the earth is a flat disc that has a magnetic field and we are attracted to it. The further we go from the surface of the earth, the weaker the field, until it reaches a point where there is no magnetic attraction what so ever. No force exerted on the object at all. I believe we can generate energy in the form of electric charges. You can prove it naively by rubbing your hair fast with a piece of paper, and - through what we call static electricity - you can see your hair being attracted to the paper.
The bigger the person, the more matter to attract, thus the bigger “magnet”, and hence will be attracted to the earth with greater force than a smaller person. THAT is what you are reading on your bathroom scales: The magnitude of the magnetic attraction. Play around with different sizes of fridge magnets. Observe what you see. Feel the magnetic attraction of bigger magnets and the lack of strength of magnetic attraction of smaller magnets. Imagine that your grocery list is a scale. Think of what it would measure for the different magnets.
Now flip the fridge, so that the magnets are hanging down. Shouldn’t the bigger, heavier magnets be much easier to pull off now considering gravity is supposedly helping you? It should, if gravity was true. Try it for yourself. It doesn’t seem to care about gravity, does it?
Also, look at the birds. They create an electric charge by flapping their wings vigorously when they lift off from the surface of the earth. That generates a repulsive magnetic force between the bird and the earth, so that they can get past the magnetic field. After the bird reaches the end of the magnetic field it is weightless, and no longer need its wings for lift. Thus, they can, and do, stop flapping their wings. They just hang there. They adjust their direction and speed beyond the magnetic field by flapping their wings.
Why don’t we have weightlessness in planes then? We do, but the planes are designed to create an enormous electro-magnet using all the wires you supposedly need to fly the plane right underneath where you sit, throughout the plane, and thus are creating an artificial magnetic field that mimics the earth. Your body knows you are being deceived, that’s why you feel the changes in acceleration when going from the “seatbelt sign” height, to the “no seatbelt sign” height. That’s why your body reacts so strangely during the “reaching cruise altitude” phase and especially the “leaving cruise altitude” phase. It’s safe to take off your seatbelt at cruise altitude because you are weightless. You can lose a wing, and it would not matter. You can lose both wings and it will be fine. In fact, you can lose the entire cabin, the entire plane and you will be fine.
Why would they deceive us like this? Well, why don’t you ask them! I know why, and I will be revealing all.
Regards,
Michael Heydenrych

---------- Post added 2010-12-25 at 02:25 PM ----------

Why I Had to Disprove Gravity
By Michael Heydenrych


It was 22 December 2010. I was getting convinced - at a fast pace - about the truth of the Bible. I decided to watch a video lecture by the creationist Kent Hovind (Dr. Dino.) I was introduced to the video lecture series of Kent Hovind by my very first best friend Magnus Janse van Rensburg on a random visit roughly 5 years (or more) ago.
I decided to watch it because I was struggling with some of the concepts of what creationists teach, and by watching it again; I hoped I would get some new understanding. Plus, Kent Hovind is a very humorous lecturer, and I needed a laugh.
Kent Hovind in his video lectures pointed out two verses in the Bible implying that there was a layer of water above the sky (Heaven):
“And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. ...” – Genesis 1:7-8 (KJV)
Based on that, he created his Hovind Theory that theorises a frozen layer of ice – just like the shell of an egg - around the earth. He then uses this layer of ice as the source of some of the waters in the flood of Noah that covered the whole earth.
While Kent focused on the conditions before and after such an ice shell, he didn’t really spend much time specifying the cause of what “broke” the shell, leaving it up to meteorites or some form of melting.
I decided I wanted to examine the melting case. Now the obvious way to make ice melt is to heat it up. Since the sun seems to be a source of heat, moving the Earth closer to the sun would heat it up and melt the ice. Then I recalled a verse from Revelation that seemed to imply that a new heaven will be created.
“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.” – Revelation 21:1 (KJV)
Why make a new heaven (restoring it to the way it was initially) if it hasn’t changed? So, in my mind, that gave me Biblical backing that heaven has changed, and thus Biblical backing that God could’ve moved the earth and/or any other body in the “solar system” around over time.
If the Hovind Theory was correct, then the water above the firmament must start out as ice – thus, far away from any heat source, and thus, far away from the sun. Then I imagined God slowly move the earth closer to the sun, heating the ice, thus breaking the shell and letting the water come tumbling down.
Then it dawned on me: If I have Biblical backing that God could’ve changed heaven over time, and then I surely have backing that God could’ve changed not only the orbit, but the axis of rotation of the Earth, as well as the time it takes the Earth to rotate around its axis. The latter being the commonly understood definition of a day.
This delighted me immensely, because it basically states that the actual length of time of a day (as we know it today) could have differed from what it was earlier in Earth’s lifetime, specifically during creation, while keeping the Biblical definition of “Day”, and “the first day” intact.
“And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.” – Genesis 1:5 (KJV)
This revelation brought the teachings of mainstream creationism and where I differed from them, in harmony. The verses that were the cause of the difference were:
“But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” – 2 Peter 3:8 (KJV)
“For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” – Psalm 90:4 (KJV)
When creationists are confronted with these two (practically) identical verses, they always brush it off, saying you may not apply that for creation. That made me so furious, and rightly so, because if you consider the previous verses in both cases, the Bible sets the context to creation specifically.
“For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: “ – 2 Peter 3:5-6
“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” – Psalm 90:2 (KJV)
Thus, the issue had been resolved which I had been struggling with. With that out of the way, I could now focus on the physical implications that will arise should God slow down the Earth.
I wanted to theorise what would happen to me should the spin of the earth be reduced. If I jumped up into the air, then I would notice I would fall back to the Earth. I was told that was due to gravity. I would also recall from experience that going faster and faster on a merry-go-around, tends to pull you away from the center of the merry-go-around. I was told that force was called “centrifugal force”. One more thing that I noticed is that if the merry-go-around stopped spinning all together, then the “centrifugal force” seems to disappear.
Armed with these two notions, I made the following derivation: Since we are not currently flying off of the surface of the Earth, which implies that the magnitude of the current centrifugal force must be less than the magnitude of the current gravity.
So based on my experience on the merry-go-around, if the Earth’s rate of spin was gradually reduced, then the centrifugal force would become less and less. So the force that is countering gravity is becoming less and less, until it is so small that it’s insignificant in comparison to gravity. So what we have left, as the Earth approaches absolute standstill, is almost just gravity. But that implies we would be crushed to death. Our ancestors clearly lived long enough to give birth to us, so the Earth couldn’t have been much slower than it is now. But it had to be slower if the Bible is to be believed. One revolution had to take roughly the same time as 1000*365 revolutions of today.
“For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” – Psalm 90:4 (KJV)
So the Bible must be wrong, or I must find some other convoluted “meaning” to this verse.
Instead, I chose to stop questioning the Bible and start questioning everything that science teaches. The thorn in my side was gravity. If gravity didn’t exist, then we wouldn’t be crushed if the Earth was slower. Unfortunately, at the present speed we should then be thrown off of the surface of the Earth due to centrifugal force – because it has lost its counter (which was gravity). But that no longer was a problem: since I am questioning everything that science teaches, I’ll question that too.
I had to go look up the equations, since I did not know them. I ended up with the following two equations as the core of the problem:
1. F = ma (Newton’s Second Law of Motion)
2. F = (G m1 m2) / r2 (Newton’s Law of Universal Grativation)

I had to disprove gravity to vindicate the Bible. And I did. But was it I that disproved it, or was it the LORD my God whom, through me, disproved it? I can tell you with absolute certainty that I could not come up with this by myself no matter how hard I tried. I prayed to God and asked for insight, and insight was given. My prayers were answered.
When you pray, God does not answer. God does not answer because He does not hear you. He does not hear you because God and sin do not get along, and you are a sinner.
The day I decided to give up sin, God suddenly could hear me. God saw my prayers were righteous, and every single one of them came to pass.
I strongly suggest you give up sin as well, and then you’ll have an open communications channel to God too.
Read the next paper to learn how exactly I gave up sin.

What do you think?

[Dotard]

Is there a TL;DR version?

[Minimalist]

AAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

[Anomalocaris]

Waste of good oxygen, must not be allowed to consume any more food that could be eaten by starving ethiopians. must be eliminated from human gene pool.

[orogenicman]

AAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Well, I guess we should recall the voyager spacecraft, since they really aren't flying out of the solar system after all.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

What do you think?

In all truthfulness, I've seen wierder things proposed by actual physicists.
However, even they made their wacky theories based on attempting to explain observation or using the observations of others.

This... is almost as bad as the entry on "relativity" in the conservapedia, aka the internet's asshole.

[Autumnlicious]

I tried reading it, but my eyes glazed over at when I realized I had to parse out equations from ideology.

What a shite head.