Tap for spoiler

The bowling ball isn’t falling to the earth faster. The higher perceived acceleration is due to the earth falling toward the bowling ball.

  • barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    You said it was movement, aka change in position over time, not acceleration, or you would have said “x will accelerate at”, not “earth will move at”. I already explained why it’s questionable as a term of acceleration.

    And this could’ve been over after a single comment of you saying “oh, yeah, misspoke”. Your math in the comment after that misbegotten term checks out, that’s not the issue here, it’s your presentation that went all haywire.

    • red
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      literally trivil matter, i didnt even say movement, the point is your statements were still brain rot nonesense and your original comment is wrong and you dont really understand stuff

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        Clarity of presentation is never a trivial matter. You can be right all you like if you don’t get it across then it will be for nought but inflating your own ego.

        • Fleur_@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 days ago

          But you’re not right?

          You’ve very clearly shown that you are wrong and then said “I’m right because I understand my explanation more than the reality of the situation”

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            I understand and agree with red’s math, and I said no such thing as you put into quotation marks there.

            • Fleur_@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              17 days ago

              Yeh tbh my bad Im a couple drinks in. All I know is that the guy who thinks the bowling ball doesn’t technically fall faster is wrong (no idea if that’s you or not) any doubters look at this equation (F = G(m1m2)/R2 ) for a couple minutes and come back to me.

              In solidarity with whoever thinks I’m wrong I’ll downvote my own comments losers

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                17 days ago

                As to “what’s falling faster” my point is still that everything’s falling at the same speed, because the only non-arbitrary reference point to measure things from is the centre of gravity of the whole system, earth, feather, ball, all of them together.

                Well it may still be arbitrary, but at least it’s not geocentric or feathercentric or ballcentric. All three can be unhappy with the choice which means it’s fair.

                Flip that reference point to the earth though and yes the ball is approaching ever so slightly faster than the feather (side note: is our earth spherical or are we at least making it an oblong?). Flip it to the ball and the feather is falling a lot slower towards it than the earth is. Which is probably how I should have started explaining this: The mass difference between feather and earth with respect to the ball is so massive that it actually makes quite a difference while between feather and ball wrt. earth it’s negligible.

                • Fleur_@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  17 days ago

                  Yeah man that wall of text and all is great. But like F = G(m1m2)/R2 is so much easier and quicker to read so I’m going with that