The World will never end...scientific proof.. - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

ADL Colin · 04-10-2005, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Some of these people will stick to what ever they learned before no matter what proof I can bring. The folks that laughed at the Wright brothers are still laughing in their graves while the rest of us are fucking in small bathrooms at 800 miles per hour above the clouds.

Fools will remain as such and new knowledge will be scorned by the ignorant.

They say I have no proof of my theory of gravity but Newton only dropped a fucking apple and they are completely convined that he knew it all.

I didn't just dream this up; I used several models to test this and I have thought about it for a few years.

No other theory has any more proof than mine; but at least my theory doesn't rest on some magical power in the center of the earth that is somehow sucking me to the surface.

So your argument is that because scientific knowledge is improving and thus was wrong at various times in the past that everyone should consider your new theory of gravity to be equivalent to Newton's laws of motions? Kepler is turning over in his his grave.

No, Newton did not not "drop an apple" and "know it all". What Newton really did is point out that an apple falls and the Moon rotates around the earth for the same reason.

He formulated the laws of motion and coinvented calculus. He wrote the Principia Mathematica which explained the classical laws of motion in great detail. He took the three laws of motion as axioms and then derived other known results from those laws.

Over the past four centuries, experiments have verified his laws basically to the error of relativity. Then in 1915 came Einstein's reformulations of gravity which showed that Newton's view was only an approximation.

"Magical power in the center of earth"? No, Einstein's General theory explains gravity as the warping of space-time itself by the energy/mass which resides in it.

You are a funny sort of troll. ;-)

Phoenix · 04-10-2005, 08:05 AM

hahaha...i like how you make up theories which go against the way things actually work

who · 04-10-2005, 08:14 AM

Wow, if you think that gravity is a 'pushing' force of a vacuum, explain to me how the density of an object alters this 'pushing force'?

For example a planet the size of earth but with 15 times the mass of earth, will have 15 times more gravitational PULL.

If gravity is a force PUSHING on the planet, then how would the planet's mass have any affect on the strength of this 'push' ??

You've simply embarrassed yourself here.

escorpio · 04-10-2005, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoNgHiTtA

God damn boy, you have smoked yourself retarded.

He doesn't have far to go to get to retarded.

Froey Twe · 04-10-2005, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Read my theory again.

The axis of earth is merely the center of the void of space.
It cannot be removed. The void in space is the air bubble in the glass of water. Move the bubble and you move the axis. Destroy the bubble with no means of escape of the gas and the buuble will reform in the only void available; which is exactly where it was in the first place.

Why are u in the adult industry you should be working for NASSA!

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

If gravity is a force PUSHING on the planet, then how would the planet's mass have any affect on the strength of this 'push' ??

You've simply embarrassed yourself here.

The same way a 25mph wind pushes on a wide wing and keeps it from moving forward while a very small wing just glides through it.

Stop making yourself look stupid.

The surface(mass) of the wing controls the pressure applied. A big fucking plane needs big fucking wings to apply enough pressure to lift it's weight.

I have to go to bed now; it's 5:30 Am and I stayed up all night.

I wil continue this in a few hours.

SongRider · 04-10-2005, 08:30 AM

If the earth exploded it would simply be gone. And the space the earth was would fill in instantly with "space". Whatever particles that happened to find a way back to the same spot earth was wouldnt be considered "earth".

That would be like taking a malted milk ball and smashing it with a hammer into dust and placing it back into the same spot before you smashed it and trying to call it a malted milk ball again. No matter how long you let it sit there it wont become a malted milk ball ever again.

you would just be left with the ingredients that at one point in time that were a malted milk ball.

Phoenix · 04-10-2005, 08:30 AM

also the theory you speak of which has gravity acting as a pushing mechanism is ridiculous.
The Earth is a powerful spatial sink as it is one body...if you blew it up into parts or enough to split the axis as you say...it would still hold almost the same gravity due to it's mass, and i doubt highly it would stop spinning as it would have momentum...therefore there would be a strong pull inward..If the pieces didnt move very far apart from each other i think they would indeed find themselves back together, as they would both have a huge gravitational attraction to each other....im picturing a yo-yo with each half representing what would be left of our earth.

You need to smoke another joint and start another thread though as this was fun to read.

ezrydn · 04-10-2005, 08:31 AM

What? A qualified "scientist" with a college degree........and can't even spell "Sphere?"

What a fucking clown!

FelixFlow · 04-10-2005, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

The same way a 25mph wind pushes on a wide wing and keeps it from moving forward while a very small wing just glides through it.

Stop making yourself look stupid.

The surface(mass) of the wing controls the pressure applied. A big fucking plane needs big fucking wings to apply enough pressure to lift it's weight.

I have to go to bed now; it's 5:30 Am and I stayed up all night.

I wil continue this in a few hours.

intresting thread....but your explaination here doesn't clarify...wake up and explain this further

who · 04-10-2005, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

The same way a 25mph wind pushes on a wide wing and keeps it from moving forward while a very small wing just glides through it.

Stop making yourself look stupid.

The surface(mass) of the wing controls the pressure applied. A big fucking plane needs big fucking wings to apply enough pressure to lift it's weight.

I have to go to bed now; it's 5:30 Am and I stayed up all night.

I wil continue this in a few hours.

Surface and MASS are two entirely different things, you silly monkey!

Screaming · 04-10-2005, 08:53 AM

ok yoda do u have any other interesting facts

who · 04-10-2005, 08:55 AM

The guy claims to be a scientist but he has no idea what the mass of an object is.

Does he think 'Density' is the name of a club in Brussels?

fusionx · 04-10-2005, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRISK

It is scientific fact that Darth Vader could use the Death Star to destroy earth. Our only hope is that a young Jedi and his two droids will save us.

This is not the scientist you are looking for...

alexg · 04-10-2005, 09:16 AM

college degree...
not enough for me to read through your whole post

NetRodent · 04-10-2005, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

They say I have no proof of my theory of gravity but Newton only dropped a fucking apple and they are completely convined that he knew it all.

I didn't just dream this up; I used several models to test this and I have thought about it for a few years.

No other theory has any more proof than mine; but at least my theory doesn't rest on some magical power in the center of the earth that is somehow sucking me to the surface.

So you're saying that space exerts pressure on objects to hold them together? Under your theory, what would happen to a normal latex balloon in space? Would it expand or contract?

If there's enough pressure to hold something with the mass and density of the earth together, surely there'd be more than enough pressure to compress a balloon down to the size of the head of a pin.

Penthouse Tony · 04-10-2005, 10:42 AM

If objects don't have a pull, but rather space has a push, then please explain high tides and their relation to the moon.

NetRodent · 04-10-2005, 10:45 AM

Also, if gravity is a push instead of a pull, please explain how orbits work.

Nysus · 04-10-2005, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Almighty Colin

...

Sorry, but there is no reason why matter will return to the same area of space if there is an explosion sufficient enough to send the pieces off fast enough - not if you adhere to the known laws of physics. Maybe you are a new Newton or Einstein but I think you're going to need to do better than THE METAPHOR OF THE OCEAN AND THE SEA by BLACKMONSTERS.

That's all folks!

Matt

European Lee · 04-10-2005, 10:58 AM

I think the bigger picture here is this..

As the theorys on gravity have yet to be conclusively proven, we could all make up our own theorys on what gravity actually is and how it acts ;)

Therefore, my theory is that gravity is made up of invisible strawberry milkshakes, please prove me wrong

Regards,

Lee

BVF · 04-10-2005, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

1. Space is an endless ocean.

How do YOU know that? When was your last trip to outer space?

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

2. If your ass exploded into pieces from the force of the rocket and flew in different directions in the sea every single piece of your ass, except those eaten by sharks will wash the fuck back up on the beach.

From your original theory, the body should "re-assemble" itself under water since the "gravity" of water pushes shit back together to fill this so called "void" you were talking about.

TheDoc · 04-10-2005, 11:51 AM

The idea of force from space producing gravity is only part of it. Without the rotation of the earth (on any access) or our solar system, gravity would break down. The larger the object?s mass the more pressure that can be added to the object, much like hear on earth.

If you put a non-spinning object in a vacuum it will not create force or pressure. The space will simply displace and make room for the object, creating no more pressure on the item holding the vacuum. If you spin the object, it creates force, if you move the object it will just simply move like we do through space, if you break it apart so it no longer has center force and the object will displace and never return. If you add in something, larger, spinning in the vacuum (like the sun) the displaced object will be pulled toward the larger object.

Very simple.. With your own theory, if you broke the earth apart. Then EACH object would now have an equal amount of EVEN pressure and would have no chance of being pushed back into that void, which wouldn?t be a void anymore because space would have filled it as soon as the object was displaced.

Your theory might work if earth was the center of the universe and 1000?s of times larger than any other object spinning in space.

jukeboxfrank · 04-10-2005, 11:55 AM

blackmonsters thank you for sharing your views, very interesting points.
You should think about drawing up a formal paper and summiting it for review to the proper academy.

SmokeyTheBear · 04-10-2005, 11:57 AM

It's sphere not spheer , your college sucks.

DWB · 04-10-2005, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoNgHiTtA

God damn boy, you have smoked yourself retarded.

LMAO

killshot · 04-10-2005, 02:17 PM

Ok.. i found a huge flaw in your theory

If gravity is a push.. then when you go underground... you will be weightless because the ground above you is blocking the gravity.

only... that doesnt happen.

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Surface and MASS are two entirely different things, you silly monkey!

Yes they are so to fully answer a previous question about a planet with the same surface but more mass then earth you need only realize that the weight of the planet(mass) is pushing against space also much like a big boat pushing against the surface of the sea. The bigger boat creates more pressure on the surface and will displace water; but the weight of space is far more than any ocean and no planet is big enough to displace space thus space pushes back on the object with the same pressure created by the mass of the object.

Analogy: Take a drum and tighten the head of the drum to a set point(this is the weight of space); now select two balls(planets) of different weight. Each ball will make a different size impression on the drum head when rested on top. The deeper impression will create the most tension on the drum head; so even though the drum head(weight of space) is stable and set it still pushes harder against the more massive object.

It's clear hear that when both balls are rested on the drum head the heavier ball will affect the pressure on the smaller ball if the smaller ball is close enough. If the big ball is big enough it will indent the drum head to the point where the smaller ball will be sucked in and possibly collide. If you move the bigger ball on the surface the smaller ball will also move(if close enough).
If the bigger ball is moved in a circle the smaller ball will be forced to circle around the large one as in orbit.
So add 8 more differrent sized balls to the drum head and move the bigger ball in a circle and you will create the solar system.

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killshot

Ok.. i found a huge flaw in your theory

If gravity is a push.. then when you go underground... you will be weightless because the ground above you is blocking the gravity.

only... that doesnt happen.

And if it's a pull then U R weightless when above ground since the ground is now blocking the gravity pulling from the center of the earth.
NOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't type "NOT" nerly fucking big enough for that line of bullshit.

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

The idea of force from space producing gravity is only part of it. Without the rotation of the earth (on any access) or our solar system, gravity would break down. The larger the object?s mass the more pressure that can be added to the object, much like hear on earth.

If you put a non-spinning object in a vacuum it will not create force or pressure. The space will simply displace and make room for the object, creating no more pressure on the item holding the vacuum. If you spin the object, it creates force, if you move the object it will just simply move like we do through space, if you break it apart so it no longer has center force and the object will displace and never return. If you add in something, larger, spinning in the vacuum (like the sun) the displaced object will be pulled toward the larger object.

Very simple.. With your own theory, if you broke the earth apart. Then EACH object would now have an equal amount of EVEN pressure and would have no chance of being pushed back into that void, which wouldn?t be a void anymore because space would have filled it as soon as the object was displaced.

Your theory might work if earth was the center of the universe and 1000?s of times larger than any other object spinning in space.

Too much emphasis on rocks in the countering opinions.
When the mass of the exploded earth returns it need not return any solid rock; I already stated that the earth will lose and even gain mass in these events. The amount of solid rock on earth is a drop in the bucket to its full mass. Earth(planets) were formed from gases that melded to form liquid and rock. If the earth exploded; it's core, it's water and the atmosphere would become gases again and will not travel very far away. This gas is the matter that will be pushed back into the void and compressed once again into a sphere. But as I also stated earlier; over enough time actual rock will begin to return.

But also as you said; if earth were the biggest body in space by a huge enough magnitude it would absolutely reassemble since it's void would be the most powerful "black hole" in space.

I really think that you are saying many of the same things I am but just using a bit differrent explanation.

CoolE · 04-10-2005, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Take two inert chemicals such as baking soda and vineger.
They do nothing by themselves; but combine them and a bubbly life is produced.

That actually made me laugh out loud!! Thank you! I needed a good laugh today!

GatorB · 04-10-2005, 03:45 PM

In 5 billion years when the sun's lifecycle is almost over it will grow into a red giant and it will expand out to the orbit or Mars so the Earth is toast. Then when the sun finally dies what's left of the Earth( if anything ) will orbit a cold dead star.

Myst · 04-10-2005, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoNgHiTtA

Damn even then they knew rednecks would need to play NASCAR simulator on the home PC.

hahahahahahahaha

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVF

How do YOU know that? When was your last trip to outer space?

From your original theory, the body should "re-assemble" itself under water since the "gravity" of water pushes shit back together to fill this so called "void" you were talking about.

First; there is no void in the earth's ocean as I propose is in space.
But if I could create a void in the ocean that could only be filled by matter other than the ocean then the dudes ass and all it's pieces would be pressed into this void. I already said that the World Trade Center will not reassemble. I state that the matter that formed it will return to the general area of earth. The void is not in the ocean in this analogy but rather it is on the shore.

The ocean is not a model of space, it is just being used to relate some similar properties.

The void and pressure thing when relating to water is like the big bubble in the water taking up smaller bubbles around it to form a even bigger bubble.

Surley you can imagine what would happen if you were swimming in the sea when a 10,000 foot radius air bubble appeared beneath you.
You would fucking fall into that void and also shit in your swim trunks.

Nismo · 04-10-2005, 04:05 PM

BVF · 04-10-2005, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

First; there is no void in the earth's ocean as I propose is in space.

Actually you're wrong since nothing touches anything else. No "matter" is really solid it's just TIGHTLY CLUMPED particles bound by energy...So that big ass ocean full of water is full of a bunch of water molecules that are not actually touching each other...

And if you want to use another analogy, (like you love to use), What about a big mountain in the middle of the ocean? Isn't that like a planet in the middle of space?

We could go on and on and back and forth with all kinds of analogies and if this was Harvard and not GFY, we could.....but what it boils down to is that neither one of us, nor anybody on this board REALLY knows what it's all about. It's only theories...

Nismo · 04-10-2005, 04:06 PM

So, you went to college & got a degree in nuclear science or some shit, but you sell porn on the internet?

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolE

That actually made me laugh out loud!! Thank you! I needed a good laugh today!

Maybe you should go buy some baking soda and pour some vinegar in it; you might then start crying after realizing who stupid you are to not have done this 3rd grade level experiment already.

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nismo

So, you went to college & got a degree in nuclear science or some shit, but you sell porn on the internet?

I claimed I was smart; I never claimed I wasn't horny.

cyber_ninja · 04-10-2005, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killshot

Ok.. i found a huge flaw in your theory

If gravity is a push.. then when you go underground... you will be weightless because the ground above you is blocking the gravity.

only... that doesnt happen.

lol,thats like saying if you go on the roof of your house you will fly away because your house is blocking gravity.

e-god · 04-10-2005, 04:18 PM

interesting read

biskoppen · 04-10-2005, 04:22 PM

BlackMonsters please contact me.. wanna discuss another theory with you

ICQ : 30898463

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biskoppen

BlackMonsters please contact me.. wanna discuss another theory with you

ICQ : 30898463

I don't do ICQ.

spill it here on the board so the rest of gfy can kill us.

Triple 6 · 04-10-2005, 05:05 PM

BM, whats your thoughts on string theory, gravitons, 11 dimensions, branes, etc?

biskoppen · 04-10-2005, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

I don't do ICQ.

spill it here on the board so the rest of gfy can kill us.

hehe, most people likes to live inside the box.. going to work .. picking up the children .. watching TV .. go to sleep

Your theory is "funny" .. what energy is pushing all the matter so all the matter pushes the earth?

About the other theory I started this thread : http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=454374

It's just the classic matrix one .. which I like alot

biskoppen · 04-10-2005, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Surface and MASS are two entirely different things, you silly monkey!

hehe, yeah.. it kinda makes it hard to explain black holes

smack · 04-10-2005, 05:32 PM

that might be plausible in a vacum (and i don't mean vacum of space, i mean a system where no other forces are acting on the object in question), but in practicality that is silly. there are too many variables including the gravity from our close neighbors like the sun and the moon.

tungsten · 04-10-2005, 05:40 PM

some interesting points but i think its sheer imagination

nico-t · 04-10-2005, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tungsten

some interesting points but i think its sheer imagination

based on......?
every theory is a good theory, simply cuz nobody knows.

blackmonsters · 04-10-2005, 05:55 PM

Bottom line here folks is that I came up with the theory and that's more than my critics can do.

But lets get to my basic claims and forget about earth exploding and all that.

My basic claim (theory) is that :

1. Space is a massive body with a mass of it's own.
2. Space does not exert a force it's force is merely it's weight.
3. Space does not roll like the sea but it's weight and pressure is similar in that going deep into it increases the pressure on a object.
4. This pressure deep in space in what creates gravity
5. Were are certainly deep in space because no motherfucker will ever see the top.

Any reasonably intelligent person should be able to see that these 5 points are a much better explanation of gravity than the notion that every celestial body magically starts sucking shit into it like a magnet.

FelixFlow · 04-10-2005, 06:04 PM

you ignored someone's earlier question, about how do you explain high-tides & the moon correlation ?

04-10-2005, 08:05 AM	#52
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,469	hahaha...i like how you make up theories which go against the way things actually work __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

04-10-2005, 08:30 AM	#58
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,469	also the theory you speak of which has gravity acting as a pushing mechanism is ridiculous. The Earth is a powerful spatial sink as it is one body...if you blew it up into parts or enough to split the axis as you say...it would still hold almost the same gravity due to it's mass, and i doubt highly it would stop spinning as it would have momentum...therefore there would be a strong pull inward..If the pieces didnt move very far apart from each other i think they would indeed find themselves back together, as they would both have a huge gravitational attraction to each other....im picturing a yo-yo with each half representing what would be left of our earth. You need to smoke another joint and start another thread though as this was fun to read. __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

04-10-2005, 08:53 AM	#62
Screaming I can change this!!!!! Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 18,972	ok yoda do u have any other interesting facts __________________

04-10-2005, 09:16 AM	#65
alexg IL4L.com Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Israel - ICQ: 162136565 Posts: 11,287	college degree... not enough for me to read through your whole post __________________ Find fuck buddies in your area!

04-10-2005, 10:42 AM	#67
Penthouse Tony Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Mountain View, CA Posts: 5,835	If objects don't have a pull, but rather space has a push, then please explain high tides and their relation to the moon. __________________ aamos AT FFN dot com Penthouse.com Business Development ICQ: 49090846 \| Yahoo IM: ff_aamos

04-10-2005, 08:14 AM	#53
who So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ICQ #23642053 Posts: 19,593	Wow, if you think that gravity is a 'pushing' force of a vacuum, explain to me how the density of an object alters this 'pushing force'? For example a planet the size of earth but with 15 times the mass of earth, will have 15 times more gravitational PULL. If gravity is a force PUSHING on the planet, then how would the planet's mass have any affect on the strength of this 'push' ?? You've simply embarrassed yourself here.

04-10-2005, 08:30 AM	#57
SongRider Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: KY- The state not the jelly Posts: 648	If the earth exploded it would simply be gone. And the space the earth was would fill in instantly with "space". Whatever particles that happened to find a way back to the same spot earth was wouldnt be considered "earth". That would be like taking a malted milk ball and smashing it with a hammer into dust and placing it back into the same spot before you smashed it and trying to call it a malted milk ball again. No matter how long you let it sit there it wont become a malted milk ball ever again. you would just be left with the ingredients that at one point in time that were a malted milk ball.

04-10-2005, 08:31 AM	#59
ezrydn Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Guadalajara, MX Posts: 695	What? A qualified "scientist" with a college degree........and can't even spell "Sphere?" What a fucking clown!

04-10-2005, 08:55 AM	#63
who So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ICQ #23642053 Posts: 19,593	The guy claims to be a scientist but he has no idea what the mass of an object is. Does he think 'Density' is the name of a club in Brussels?

04-10-2005, 10:45 AM	#68
NetRodent Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: In the walls of your house. Posts: 3,985	Also, if gravity is a push instead of a pull, please explain how orbits work. __________________ "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." --H.L. Mencken

04-10-2005, 10:58 AM	#70
European Lee Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Daytona Beach Posts: 7,133	I think the bigger picture here is this.. As the theorys on gravity have yet to be conclusively proven, we could all make up our own theorys on what gravity actually is and how it acts ;) Therefore, my theory is that gravity is made up of invisible strawberry milkshakes, please prove me wrong Regards, Lee __________________ YOUR TRAFFIC IS SAFE WITH US - CONDOM CASH PUTTING THE GAY ADULT INDUSTRY ON YOUR PC!! AFFORDABLE 2257 COMPLIANT GAY + BI CONTENT

04-10-2005, 11:51 AM	#72
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	The idea of force from space producing gravity is only part of it. Without the rotation of the earth (on any access) or our solar system, gravity would break down. The larger the object?s mass the more pressure that can be added to the object, much like hear on earth. If you put a non-spinning object in a vacuum it will not create force or pressure. The space will simply displace and make room for the object, creating no more pressure on the item holding the vacuum. If you spin the object, it creates force, if you move the object it will just simply move like we do through space, if you break it apart so it no longer has center force and the object will displace and never return. If you add in something, larger, spinning in the vacuum (like the sun) the displaced object will be pulled toward the larger object. Very simple.. With your own theory, if you broke the earth apart. Then EACH object would now have an equal amount of EVEN pressure and would have no chance of being pushed back into that void, which wouldn?t be a void anymore because space would have filled it as soon as the object was displaced. Your theory might work if earth was the center of the universe and 1000?s of times larger than any other object spinning in space. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation

04-10-2005, 11:55 AM	#73
jukeboxfrank Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: www.jenniferworthington.com Posts: 1,207	blackmonsters thank you for sharing your views, very interesting points. You should think about drawing up a formal paper and summiting it for review to the proper academy. __________________ ICQ= 231-182-592

04-10-2005, 11:57 AM	#74
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	It's sphere not spheer , your college sucks. __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

04-10-2005, 02:17 PM	#76
killshot Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OGG / PDX Posts: 456	Ok.. i found a huge flaw in your theory If gravity is a push.. then when you go underground... you will be weightless because the ground above you is blocking the gravity. only... that doesnt happen. __________________

04-10-2005, 03:45 PM	#81
GatorB The Demon & 12clicks Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: SallyRand is a FAGGOT Posts: 18,208	In 5 billion years when the sun's lifecycle is almost over it will grow into a red giant and it will expand out to the orbit or Mars so the Earth is toast. Then when the sun finally dies what's left of the Earth( if anything ) will orbit a cold dead star.

04-10-2005, 04:05 PM	#84
Nismo Confirmed User Join Date: May 2002 Location: FLORIDA Posts: 4,977	__________________ i buy massive xxx dating traffic.

04-10-2005, 04:06 PM	#86
Nismo Confirmed User Join Date: May 2002 Location: FLORIDA Posts: 4,977	So, you went to college & got a degree in nuclear science or some shit, but you sell porn on the internet? __________________ i buy massive xxx dating traffic.

04-10-2005, 04:18 PM	#90
e-god Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: BabeLand Posts: 1,736	interesting read __________________

04-10-2005, 04:22 PM	#91
biskoppen Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Very small penis Posts: 5,809	BlackMonsters please contact me.. wanna discuss another theory with you ICQ : 30898463 __________________ Submit my videos to make bank, tons of 5 minute videos offered right here

04-10-2005, 05:05 PM	#93
Triple 6 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: isN'T everything Posts: 5,394	BM, whats your thoughts on string theory, gravitons, 11 dimensions, branes, etc? __________________ SIG TOO SMALL! Maximum 1200x600 button and no more than 30 text lines of ALL SIZES and COLORS. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 6240x4800 instead of a 1024x800.

04-10-2005, 05:32 PM	#96
smack Push Porn Like Weight. Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Inside .NET Posts: 10,652	that might be plausible in a vacum (and i don't mean vacum of space, i mean a system where no other forces are acting on the object in question), but in practicality that is silly. there are too many variables including the gravity from our close neighbors like the sun and the moon. __________________ Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.

04-10-2005, 05:40 PM	#97
tungsten Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 10,579	some interesting points but i think its sheer imagination __________________ VOYEUR /HOMEMADE, HENTAI / CARTOON, Reality, Amateur, Shemale, Hardcore, Cuckold, Celebrity, Retro/Vintage, ect...ALL OUR SITES >> Unbelievable Ratio \| High % of Rebills \| Bi-Monthly Payments (also to E-Passporte) Ton's of EXCLUSIVE Free content & FHG's \|=> GREAT REVENUE $$$ GUARANTEED!

04-10-2005, 05:55 PM	#99
blackmonsters Making PHP work Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: 🌎🌅🌈🌇 Posts: 20,691	Bottom line here folks is that I came up with the theory and that's more than my critics can do. But lets get to my basic claims and forget about earth exploding and all that. My basic claim (theory) is that : 1. Space is a massive body with a mass of it's own. 2. Space does not exert a force it's force is merely it's weight. 3. Space does not roll like the sea but it's weight and pressure is similar in that going deep into it increases the pressure on a object. 4. This pressure deep in space in what creates gravity 5. Were are certainly deep in space because no motherfucker will ever see the top. Any reasonably intelligent person should be able to see that these 5 points are a much better explanation of gravity than the notion that every celestial body magically starts sucking shit into it like a magnet. __________________ Get paid, get tools, get going with Camsoda Join Chaturbate get your cut of the pie

04-10-2005, 06:04 PM	#100
FelixFlow Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,779	you ignored someone's earlier question, about how do you explain high-tides & the moon correlation ? __________________ ICQ: 643 339 687