1. Banned
Join Date
Nov 2006
Posts
80
I was watching a rather entertaining documentary show once about polar shifts. They claimed, I don't remember the actual reasoning for it, that the Earth's gravity would increase in such an event. They interviewed people that were actually prepared for such an event and had positioned supplies, food etc. on the floor as they would be unable to stand up with increased gravitational forces. If this event is feasable, could this be a another hypothesis for the extinction of the dinasours?

2. Originally Posted by kryton
If this event is feasable, could this be a another hypothesis for the extinction of the dinasours?
Yes. It could. But.

But I'm almost lost in your hypotheticals. To me, it's not a great way to ask a question: if hypothetical X is possible, could Y that depends on X be a hypothesis? Is a yes to that worth very much?

Anyway, it is not consistent with what we know that Earth's gravity would change with a pole shift. Gravitational force is proportional to mass. If the mass is constant, the force of gravity is constant.

The facts seem to make both hypotheticals extinct.

3. Banned
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
14,315
Originally Posted by Delvo
...but when the change is a whopping ounce, that's about the same anyway.
Yep. My body weight changes more than that in just fifteen minutes of cycling.

Or 30 seconds on the john...

4. Originally Posted by unknownspiritx
so space itself has no gravity? (or would have no gravity if there were no objects with mass in it?) its just all the objects that are in space that creates gravity between each other?

Oh and one more question, is it always true that density will increase as mass increases?

which means increase in mass= increase in gravity=increase in density

Anyways, your explanation was simple but fantastic. I think i understand the mass-gravity relation well now. Thanks

unknowspiritx,
You can increase the density of an object and decrease the mass of the object at the same time. Space is full of gravity, mass doesn't contain gravity. Mass displaces the space around it, this dispacement is gravity. Gravity is a push to a lower force from a higher force. The energy around an object expandes faster than the masses energy, because mass is a condensed form of energy, these are the high and low forces that give us gravity. You're not going to find that in any physics books back in class, but it doesn't mean that it can't be true. Actually using this thought prosses answers questions that can't be answered by scientists right now.

5. Originally Posted by rebel
You're not going to find that in any physics books back in class, but it doesn't mean that it can't be true. Actually using this thought prosses answers questions that can't be answered by scientists right now.
This sounds like a good item for the ATM forum. Present your idea, with supporting evidence, there and we can discuss it and ask questions about it. It is not, however, appropriate for the Q&A forum.

6. Originally Posted by Van Rijn
This sounds like a good item for the ATM forum. Present your idea, with supporting evidence, there and we can discuss it and ask questions about it. It is not, however, appropriate for the Q&A forum.
Van Rijn,
If you have a question don't be afraid to ask.

I also have an invisible elf trap 100% gauranteed to eliminate your elf problem in your backyard.

7. Originally Posted by rebel
Van Rijn,
If you have a question don't be afraid to ask.
I think you've missed the point. This is not the place to discuss your ATM idea. This is the place to discuss mainstream answers. Ergo, your ATM idea will have to have questions asked about it elsewhere.

I also have an invisible elf trap 100% gauranteed to eliminate your elf problem in your backyard.
Whoever said she was a problem?

8. Gillianrin,

Back on page one of this discussion, replies #14, and #16 from Unknownspiritx asked questions that I just answered.

Sorry, I couldn't tell she was female.

Anymore questions about gravity or mass?

9. Originally Posted by rebel
Gillianrin,

Back on page one of this discussion, replies #14, and #16 from Unknownspiritx asked questions that I just answered.
And your answer was ATM, as you said yourself ("would not be found in a physics book"). Again, that is not appropriate for Q&A.

10. Van Rijn,

What does ATM stand for?

11. Originally Posted by rebel
Van Rijn,

What does ATM stand for?
"Against the Mainstream." See here:

http://www.bautforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17

12. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Dec 2004
Posts
11,828
I think it stands for "amateur telescope making", but here on BAUT
it means "Against the Mainstream", which is the name of the board
where ideas such as yours may be discussed. That board can be
found near the bottom of the BAUT Forum main page.

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis
Last edited by Jeff Root; 2007-Apr-24 at 01:56 AM. Reason: Missed it by less than a minute.

13. Established Member
Join Date
Oct 2003
Posts
1,223
Originally Posted by rebel
Van Rijn,

What does ATM stand for?
Against The Mainstream, there is an entier section of this board devoted to it and discussion of that sort of idea outside that section is very strongly discouraged.

14. van Rijn,

I couldn't help but notice the only question you ask is "how do you prove me wrong", is this an exeptable question to be asking over and over and over and over again?

At least I'm asking questions. The only kind of people who don't ask questions are the one's who think that they have all the answers.

15. Originally Posted by rebel
van Rijn,

I couldn't help but notice the only question you ask is "how do you prove me wrong", is this an exeptable question to be asking over and over and over and over again?
That's my signature line. I regularly ask questions, when appropriate.

16. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
3,424
According to main stream thery, We do not expect gravity to increase significantly when the magnetic poles reverse. A shift of the pole of rotation is not expected to exceed 25 degrees. This is changing about one degree per 1000 years accompanied by less than one part per million increase in gravity per 1000 years near the site of the former equator.
If you have reason to think otherwise, please explain in the ATM fourm. Neil

17. censored again,

Nereid has asked me not to post to any other thread except "my theory of the creation of the universe".

big brother is watching, gotta go.

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•