Faith in Universal Gravity versus personal measurements of Local Gravity

Chapter Title : Faith in Universal Gravity versus personal measurements of Local Gravity

Have you joined the Universal Church of gravity or do you rely on your own gravitational measurements?

Universal gravity has never been validly tested by the general public but local gravity has

Local gravity has been measured but a universal gravitational constant has never been measured by members of the general public in a scientifically valid way.  

How to test for local gravity

Take a ruler and place it vertically.  Film a falling sphere shaped object like a ball.

Velocity is composed of direction of travel and speed 

Watch your film and make a table of the height of the ball at different times.

The velocity will be the rate of change of the position of the object with respect to time.  

The acceleration will be the rate of change of the velocity of the object with respect to time.

A process called numerical differentiation will be used twice

Numerical differentiation is mathematically simple enough to learn how to do that it should be possible to do for someone who passed high school algebra even though it is usually taught in beginner level calculus courses

The first time to get velocity from the time and position data

The second time to get acceleration from the velocity data

Average velocity should be different for each time interval once the ball starts falling until it stops

The average acceleration will be calculated looking at changes in the average velocity

The average acceleration should be approximately the same each time it is calculated between two average velocities

Collecting data using video frames

Each frame is a moment in time that the video has a picture as defined in video making and not a physics frame of reference.  Each frame you look at to collect data should be an equal time period apart from the next and or previous frame you collect data from.

The ball should already be moving down at the first frame you collect data from and should still be moving down at the last frame you look at, without having hit a solid object like a floor or table counter yet.  This is to prevent having to measure exactly when you let go of the ball or exactly when it hit the ground so an extra amount of time when it is not falling is not accidentally counted as time that it is falling when doing calculations.

Calculating average speed between two frames

You might take the change in distance between frames divided by the change in time between frames.  

X seconds = time between frames

X seconds will be much less than 1 second

X is a fractional much less than 1

Let's say you have three frames called frame 1, frame 2 and frame 3 each X seconds apart

frame 1 occurs at 0 seconds

frame 2 occurs at X seconds

frame 3 occurs at 2X seconds

Then you would know the average speed between frame 1 and frame 2 and the average speed between frame 2 and frame 3

( Height in frame 1 - height in frame 2 ) / X seconds = Average downward speed from frame 1 to frame 2

 ( Height in frame 2 - height in frame 3 ) / X seconds = Average downward speed from frame 2 and frame 3

You would then calculate the average acceleration between frame 1 and frame 3 the following way

Gravitational Acceleration = (Average speed between frame 2 and frame 3 - Average speed between frame 2 and frame 1 ) / X seconds

( Double check that you divide by X seconds instead of 2X seconds or something else on the second round of differentiation by creating an example )

The acceleration due to gravity which can be measured in this experiment is called the local gravitational constant

The local gravitational constant is claimed to be about 10 meters per second squared when rounded at locations civilians in the general public can measure it, if that is correct you should get approximately the same answer when rounding to the nearest meter per second squared

Why a sphere shaped ball?

The falling object should be shaped like a sphere because the direction and magnitude of the force from air friction is based on the shape of the object and it's velocity composed of it's direction of travel and it's speed.  No matter how you rotate a sphere the shape is still the same relative to the direction it is moving against air.

If need be you may have to figure out air friction using differential equations but this can be reduced by dropping the ball in a imperfect vacuum.  If you do so do not forget that the glass surrounding the vacuum will influence the appearance of the ball and the ruler and may effect measurements.  Most likely no differential equation involving air friction will be needed for most types of balls to get close enough results even with a vacuum.

How would someone find a universal gravitational constant

A claim is made that the local gravitational constant is equal to the mass of a object exerting pulling force on another object being pulled times the universal gravitation constant divided by the distance between the objects squared

Local Gravitational Constant = Mass of pulling object * Universal Gravitational Constant / Distance between Objects Squared ( Allegedly )

Universal Gravitational Constant = Local Gravitational Constant * Distance between Objects Squared / Mass of Pulling Object ( Allegedly )

The force on the object receiving gravitational pull is then equal to it's local gravitational constant times the mass of the object receiving the effect of the gravity.  This specific force an object experiences due to gravity is called the object's weight.

Weight = Universal Gravitational Constant * Mass of object being pulled * Mass of pulling object / Distance between objects Squared ( This is alleged )

Weight = Local Gravitational Constant * Mass of object being pulled ( This is testable )

The weight of an object is how much force it exerts on a scale that holds it stationary.  When a scale holds a object stationary it prevents the force of gravity from causing it to accelerate.  

The measuring scale produces a force equal to the weight of the object pushing or pulling upward on the object to hold it stationary in place so that it does not fall.  Measuring scales that pull up might suspend an object by a spring where as measuring scales that push up might include a bathroom scale where someone stands on it or a balance scale where the object is placed on one of the two plates connected to the scale by arms.

There is a lot of confusion about the difference between weight and mass due to teachers badly explaining science after showing students NASA propaganda films.  Teachers put students on wild goose chases about how the weight of an object on the moon is allegedly different than the weight of the same object on the earth.  The alleged difference between weight on the moon and weight on the earth has nothing to do with the difference between weight and mass.  This is because there is a difference between the mass of a object on earth and the weight of the same object on earth. 

The mass of a object is simply it's weight divided by the acceleration it would experience as a result of gravity if it was not held in place by a scale.  Weight measures a amount of force and mass does not measure a amount of force.  

The equations presented below are only for traveling in a straight line and not for rotating.  These equations are specific to either an object being prevented from falling by being set on a scale to measure weight or for a falling object.

Local Gravitational Constant = The amount of acceleration due to the force of gravity a falling object would experience at a specific location if there were no other interfering forces ( This is testable )

Acceleration = Total Net Force / Mass ( This is testable )

Mass = Weight / Acceleration ( This is testable )

Mass = Weight ( on scale when stationary at a specific location ) / ( Acceleration an object would experience when falling due to gravity if no other interfering forces were present )

Interfering forces for an object falling though air can include but are not limited to factors involving buoyancy, air friction and wind

One would make progress toward confirming a universal gravitational constant by showing that the local gravitational constant can be correctly predicted by the equations showing the alleged relation between a local gravitational constant and a universal gravitational constant described above

There are two ways to measure a local gravitational constant.  By measuring the weight of an object or by measuring the acceleration of a object.

One way to try to confirm a universal gravitational constant would involve measuring a different amount of weight due to gravity for the same object of the same mass when held stationary by a scale at different locations.  

Another way to try to confirm a universal gravitational constant would be to measure a different amount of acceleration due to gravity measured for the same object falling at different locations

Both of these methods require showing a local gravitational constant to be different by a practically significant amount at different locations

In other words if no practically significant difference in local gravitational constants can be found then no proof of a practically useful universal gravitational constant exists

If a practically significant difference was found one would then have to show that it was related to the mass of the object exerting gravity on the other object and the distance between the two objects in the manner described above before making progress toward confirming a universal gravitational constant

No practically significant differences in local gravity have been found by civilians in the general public at different locations

This magnitude of local gravity has been found to be approximately the same at all altitudes the general public have been able to travel to to perform experiments on.  At all altitudes the public can experiment at the magnitude of force from local gravity has been found to be approximately 10 meters per second squared when rounded.

No practically significant differences in local gravity found at different altitudes with real experimental footage available to the general public

The magnitude of local gravity might hypothetically be different at positive altitudes that were to high or negative altitudes that were to low for civilians in the general public to reach but civilians in the general public have been unable to due any experiments to show any practically significant differences in the magnitude of gravity at different altitudes such as in "outer space."  Any experiments involving differences in local gravity in any international space station or on the moon or on mars should be assumed to be fake until proven real because of the history of NASA sending fake propaganda pieces to the public.  Any experiments showing any differences in local gravity in deep underground tunnels or deep underwater submarines at a depth deeper than the general public can access should also be assumed to be fake until proven real.

It is easier to find claimed differences in measured local gravity in locations at or above sea level than at locations underwater or underground

There might be small published differences of less than 1% in areas available to civilians in the general public but a difference of less than 1% could be caused by other factors than differences in local gravity that are mistaken as differences in local gravity

In combination, the equatorial bulge and the effects of the surface centrifugal force due to rotation mean that sea-level gravity increases from about 9.780 m/s2 at the Equator to about 9.832 m/s2 at the poles, so an object will weigh approximately 0.5% more at the poles than at the Equator.

https://web.archive.org/web/20221204043447/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth

Tools exist for calculating the strength of gravity at various cities around the world.[17] The effect of latitude can be clearly seen with gravity in high-latitude cities: Anchorage (9.826 m/s2), Helsinki (9.825 m/s2), being about 0.5% greater than that in cities near the equator: 

https://web.archive.org/web/20221204043447/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth

Gravity decreases with altitude as one rises above the Earth's surface because greater altitude means greater distance from the Earth's centre. All other things being equal, an increase in altitude from sea level to 9,000 metres (30,000 ft) causes a weight decrease of about 0.29%. (An additional factor affecting apparent weight is the decrease in air density at altitude, which lessens an object's buoyancy.[12] This would increase a person's apparent weight at an altitude of 9,000 metres by about 0.08%)

https://web.archive.org/web/20221204043447/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth

Commercial aircraft today cruise at altitudes of 30,000 feet and beyond.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200430021922/https://simpleflying.com/how-high-can-commercial-passenger-planes-fly/

Most commercial aircraft are approved to fly at a maximum of around 42,000 feet, also known as a ‘service ceiling.’ 

https://web.archive.org/web/20200430021922/https://simpleflying.com/how-high-can-commercial-passenger-planes-fly/

No practically significant differences in local gravity found from the presence of masses in valid real life laboratory experiments.  Therefore no reasonable proof of a universal gravitational constant is available to civilians in the general public.

It has been claimed you do not have to travel to "outer space" to test the universal gravitational constant but it can be measured right here on earth.  Such tests involve possessing objects with a high mass and claiming to show a force can be measured on other objects.  The person performing the experiment will measure the force exerted on a object due to these large masses in the room but will not measure their own mass or their own distance from the object which would interfere with the reading.  But that is not that bad because there will be walls in the room which have never had their mass measured or their distance from the object measured.  But that is not that bad because the walls will be part of a building that has more mass than the walls in one room.  I guess all the walls in the building better have equal density and your experiment better be exactly in a room in the horizontal center of the building on the floor halfway between the highest and lowest floor of the building.  And your experiment better be in the center of the room with no objects like chairs, tables, desks or book cases placed around it.  And you better not be in that room but have a camera system that has less mass then you do set up to observe it which somehow does not exert any electromagnetic influences to effect the result.  And it better be a soundless, room without the slightest breeze and temperature controls and so on and so forth as to not interfere with these absurdly minute measurement differences that are smaller than any differences created by any of the things listed.

The Cavendish Experiment

by Miles Mathis

"That is to say, we now accept apples as having easily measurable and verifiable gravitational attractions, but we ignore the gravitational attractions of walls weighing thousands of pounds."

http://web.archive.org/web/20220130225907/http://milesmathis.com/caven.html

Evidence to help confirm a Universal Gravitational Constant might exist but is not available to civilians in the general the public

We can not trust evidence for a universal gravitational constant based on "space missions" because "space mission" footage given to the public is generally fake.  However someone on a real space mission might have found a practically significant difference in local gravity in "outer space" which would help confirm the existence of a Universal Gravitational Constant.

"It is a common misconception that astronauts in orbit are weightless because they have flown high enough to escape the Earth's gravity. In fact, at an altitude of 400 kilometres (250 mi), equivalent to a typical orbit of the ISS, gravity is still nearly 90% as strong as at the Earth's surface. Weightlessness actually occurs because orbiting objects are in free-fall."

https://web.archive.org/web/20221204043447/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth

The magnitude and direction of local gravity for different earth shape models

The amount or magnitude of force from local gravity would be the same but the sense or direction would have to be different

Gravity on the oblate spheroid heliocentric earth model

The direction of gravity force vectors would be not parallel but would all point toward the center of the earth.  All force vectors from gravity would have a magnitude rounded to approximately 10 meters per second squared times the mass of the object experiencing gravity. 

Gravity on a model of a unlimited plane earth of unlimited downward length

The direction of all force vectors from gravity would be parallel unlike in a spherical earth.  All force vectors from gravity would have a magnitude rounded to approximately 10 meters per second squared times the mass of the object experiencing gravity.

Fluid

By fluid I mean a liquid, gas, or plasma state of matter.  A fluid might or might not also potentially include a amorrphous solid like melting butter.  A fluid does not include a crystalline solid in this context.

Compression

All fluids are compressed to some degree or another at all times but some fluids are more compressed than others.  

Direction of pressure

Fluids exert pressure resisting their direction of compression against all objects that touch them at all times and exert pressure in all directions.  Parts of a fluid will exert pressure on other parts of the same fluid as long as they are touching each other.  By all directions I do not mean that a section of fluid exerts pressure on a single object in all directions but that a section of fluid will exert pressure in every single direction.  A section of fluid exerts upward pressure against a object above it, downward pressure against a object below it, pressure to the left against a object to the left of it, pressure to the right against a object to the right of it, forward pressure against a object in front of it and backward pressure against a object behind it and so on and so forth. 

What about the claim made by some flat earthers of their being no gravity but only bouyancy and density?

This claim is absolutely wrong because there is no direction to bouyancy without gravity.  Bouyancy is caused by forces that push in all directions when fluids are compressed combined with the fact that objects with a greater mass experience a greater force in a specific downward direction from local gravity.  Objects will experience forces from compressed fluids above them pushing them down and forces from compressed fluids below them pushing them up.  Those objects with a greater density have a greater mass per volume and therefore experience more gravitational force per volume.  Objects of the same shape at the same altitude with a higher density will experience more force per volume pushing them down than objects with a lower density which have less force per volume pushing them down.  All objects will experience forces from the fluids below them pushing them up and the fluids below them pushing them down.  If in the vertical component a negative direction is down and a positive direction is up then when the combination of all forces an object experiences are added together

What might be reside at different altitudes on a flat earth based on this gravitational model?

As one increases in altitude the average mean density of any unlimited horizontal cross section would decrease due to gravity.  As one decreases in altitude the average mean density of any unlimited horizontal cross section would increase due to gravity.

When fluids are mixed fluids with a higher density tend to move down and those with a lower density tend to move up due to pressure in all directions from non gravitational forces and pressure in one direction from gravity.

Below the earth

At distances deeper down than the general public has traveled undiscovered ( by the general public ) substances or materials might exist with higher density and or molar or mass then substances found at altitudes the general public can travel to.  These substances might have a increased density due to a higher pressure at a lower depth but might still have a higher density due to their material nature and not just pressure even at sea level.  That is if some of these undiscovered substances were taken up to sea level they might have a density and or molar mass higher than any substance ever discovered so far by the general public.

Above the earth

At distances higher up than the general public has traveled undiscovered ( by the general public ) substances or materials might exist with higher density and or molar or mass then substances found at altitudes the general public can travel to.  These substances might have a increased density due to a higher pressure at a lower depth but might still have a higher density due to their material nature and not just pressure even at sea level.  That is if some of these undiscovered substances were taken up to sea level they might have a density and or molar mass higher than any substance ever discovered so far by the general public.  These very high density materials might include elements with a higher atomic number then any currently discovered stable element and or isotopes of elements with more neutrons per nucleus than anything currently discovered based on the standard periodic table model.  These very high density elements might include materials that would not even fit on the periodic table of elements as it is presently understood.

Stars

Stars would float at higher altitudes than the public can access due to having a very low density and due to buoyancy.  Stars might be made out of a hot plasma or gas mixture made of hydrogen and helium with a lower density than cooler gas mixtures made of hydrogen and helium.  Stars would float up because hot fluids tend to float higher than cold fluids for the same type of fluid such as hot air balloons and be bright due to hot objects emitting light.  Stars might rotate around a electro magnetic axis that effects compasses on earth due to being so hot that they are a plasma state of matter which is ionized and susceptible to be moved by electromagnetism.  Stars could also be made out of some undiscovered material having a lower molar mass than hydrogen that would not fit on the periodic table of elements as it is presently understood instead of out of hydrogen and helium.  If stars are made out of hydrogen and helium then above hydrogen stars there might exist a material having a lower molar mass than hydrogen that would not fit on the periodic table of elements as it is presently understood instead of out of hydrogen and helium.

No dome is required because no perfect vacuum has been discovered

Many flat earthers claim a dome is necessary because a fluid like air can not exist next to a vacuum without a solid object between the fluid and the vacuum.  But "outer space" is not a perfect vacuum but a low density fluid which is called a imperfect vacuum.  Instead of a dome there would just be a lower and lower density fluid the higher you get.  

Domed flat earth and globe models limit one's willingness to explore

Tim Ozman who is not a flat earther but who is shape agnostic has claimed that the dome mechanism is a way to say you can only travel so far.  If flat earthers believe in a dome they will be discouraged from exploring new places beyond the dome they imagine.  This is similar to how some globe earthers believe "nothing left to explore" after seeing fraudulent pictures of the earth from "outer space."  An example of this occurs in the Truman Show where Truman is shown a map and told there is "nothing left to explore."

There is another quote from the Truman show which some flat earthers think might involve traveling to the south pole which they believe is really a ice wall not a pole.  Some people would argue Truman might just be talking about traveling on the south face of a mountain which could be located somewhere else than antartica.

Flashback: Truman at School 

YOUNG TRUMAN I'd like to be an explorer. Like the 

great Magellan. 

980 TEACHER (a bit too quickly and pulling down a map of 

the world) Oh, you're too late. There's really 

nothing left to explore. 

https://archive.org/stream/full-transcription-truman-show/Full_Transcription_Truman_Show_djvu.txt

TRUMAN

 ...personally I think the unconquered south face is the only one worth scaling...of course it's a 20,000 foot sheer wall of ice but then when did that ever stop me before?...Naturally, I intend to make the ascent without the benefit of oxygen but also without crampons or even an ice pick...risks?... (smug, TV smiles) ...sure I'm aware of the risks--why else do you think I would spend seven years as an adjuster in a life insurance company...?

Page 2

https://web.archive.org/web/20221209154704/https://thescriptlab.com/wp-content/uploads/scripts/The_Truman_Show.pdf

Copyright Carl Janssen 2022