# Science already knows the magic of gravity

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by theorist-constant12345, Feb 25, 2015.

1. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
Hello, after considering the knowledge science already has, I consider science already have the answer to the what the ''magic'' of gravity is.

F=ma

The result equals Newtons, 1 newton is 1 joule?

If an object has a potential energy contained that equals x amount of energy.

The gravity applies a force on this object, a force that in the end is equal to joules of energy, are you not already measuring the magic?

example - a 1kg mass that contains x amount of energy potential, in a stationary reference frame on Earth , is subject to 9.81 newtons/9.81 Joules of energy loss compared to the original energy contained within the object.

3. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
No.
Sheer drivel.

It would be FAR better if, before "considering the knowledge science already has", you spent some time actually LEARNING that knowledge as opposed to skimming it, picking terminology and misapplying.

(For example a newton is NOT a joule [1]).

1 Clue: two different words.

5. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
huh, newtons can be converted into joules, I miss your point?

What is one Newton equal to in Joules?

Is a Newton meter different?

I am in favour of science in this thread, do not be so harsh, I think you already have the ''magic'' answered.

7. ### rpennerFully WiredRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
4,833
That is a step backwards to Newton's laws of motion. Gravity was first explained by Newton in his law of universal gravitation: $\vec{F} = - G \sum_k \frac{M_k m}{\left| \vec{r}_k \right| ^3 } \vec{r}_k$ which together with what you quoted gives: $\vec{a} = - G \sum_k \frac{M_k}{\left| \vec{r}_k \right| ^2 } \hat{r}_k$.
Anyone can say that but it is the definition of a false statement because in fact no one can do it.

You need to answer these questions for yourself before posting again so that your next post will be an apology.

8. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
Are you saying the newton to joules converters on the internet are all fake?

If so then a big Oh, from me. An apology what for? I do not need to apologise for saying I think science already knows the magic.

P.s your calculations are beyond my basics.

9. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,450
His point was that you asked if 1 newton is 1 joule and the answer is no.
A newton is a unit of force and a joule is a unit of energy so your question is meaningless.
Different than what? A newton meter is a joule
The units of a newton is $\frac{kg*m}{s^2}$
The units of a joule is $\frac{kg*m^2}{s^2}$
You have stated you are not in favor of science.
You do not have even a basic understanding of science and math.
There is no magic.

10. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
There aren't ANY "newton to joules" converters.
Take another look and try to learn.
If you actually did find one then yes, it's a fake.

11. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
A newton meter is a joule, but a newton is not a joule when F=ma, oh I think I get it now.

12. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Correct.

No.
A newton is NEVER a joule.

Obviously not.

13. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
10,450
I doubt that.

14. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
That is what I said ,

15. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
That would be a lie.
What you actually said (and I'm quoting from post #8) is: a newton is not a joule when F=ma.
You were wrong.
A newton is NEVER a joule.
(Oh and you appear to have fabricated "newton to joules converters on the internet" - any links?).

16. ### rpennerFully WiredRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
4,833
2125 posts.

Russ_Watters and Dywyddyr like this.
17. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
4,080
Ugh. If I come out from the cold and sit at my desk in a warm room, I could say that x amount of Joules of heat was transfered to me in y amount of time from the environment as I get warmer.

You can say things like: x amount of Joules of work was done on a system by its environment in y time.

But that's pretty much all I'll say.

18. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,334
If it is just heat transfer in response to a thermal gradient, because your body is colder than the room, then no work is done, it's just heat flow. If there were some mechanical action causing heat to be generated, that would be doing work.

19. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
4,080
I didn't concretely say it was; it could've been his question...

I'm also busy.

20. ### KristofferGiant HyraxValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,233
Wingardium levio-sar!

Messages:
4,080

22. ### theorist-constant12345BannedBanned

Messages:
2,660
I have forum stalkers how quaint.

So you tell me what do you think the mechanism is of gravity?

23. ### Beer w/StrawTranscendental Ignorance!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
4,080
"Forum stalkers"?

Bye now.