Search Results
ID: DH277iOR/pol/509350698#509354182
7/3/2025, 2:16:41 AM
>(((Math)))
6/12/2025, 10:02:54 AM
>>40513963
>you already know the answer; tiny amounts of gas are not comparable to gas giants.
Physics is scalable. If it doesn’t happen on a small scale, it’s not happening on a large scale either. How would a large gas planet ever start forming if all of the gas particles are dispersing rather than moving toward eachother? It’s obviously nonsense. Your religious beliefs are contrary to actual empirical demonstrable proof of gas behavior,
>As mass increases so does weight.
That’s a non sequitur to the question I asked you.
>No other model performs as well
TOPKEK! See:
>>40463337
>>40496037
Your model of gravity is admittedly off by 97% on the cosmological scale, 100% on the quantum scale, and can’t even explain observations within our own “solar system” such as Mercury’s perihelion shift. That’s as bad as it gets in terms of performance.
>bulk matter is electrically neutral; different types of metal, ferromagnetic, diamagnetic...etc don't perform differently under gravity [they would under Electric Universe]
Straw man. Already addressed that here:
>>40395107
>Faraday cages would make you float if gravity was electric..etc.).
Another blatant strawman. Faraday cages admittedly don’t completely eliminate electrostatics. Literally all molecular and intermolecular matter is electrostatic in nature. You cannot name a single piece of matter which isn’t. The faraday cage itself is electrostatic ffs. You can literally never remove its effects.
>you already know the answer; tiny amounts of gas are not comparable to gas giants.
Physics is scalable. If it doesn’t happen on a small scale, it’s not happening on a large scale either. How would a large gas planet ever start forming if all of the gas particles are dispersing rather than moving toward eachother? It’s obviously nonsense. Your religious beliefs are contrary to actual empirical demonstrable proof of gas behavior,
>As mass increases so does weight.
That’s a non sequitur to the question I asked you.
>No other model performs as well
TOPKEK! See:
>>40463337
>>40496037
Your model of gravity is admittedly off by 97% on the cosmological scale, 100% on the quantum scale, and can’t even explain observations within our own “solar system” such as Mercury’s perihelion shift. That’s as bad as it gets in terms of performance.
>bulk matter is electrically neutral; different types of metal, ferromagnetic, diamagnetic...etc don't perform differently under gravity [they would under Electric Universe]
Straw man. Already addressed that here:
>>40395107
>Faraday cages would make you float if gravity was electric..etc.).
Another blatant strawman. Faraday cages admittedly don’t completely eliminate electrostatics. Literally all molecular and intermolecular matter is electrostatic in nature. You cannot name a single piece of matter which isn’t. The faraday cage itself is electrostatic ffs. You can literally never remove its effects.
Page 1