Are we less heavy at the equator?

@mark noble,

The formula for weight in physics is:

w = mg

where w is weight, m is mass, and g is the acceleration due to gravity. It kind of seems like weight has something to do with mass.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

'Your' observation makes it 'relative'.
And 'YOU' are its only observer.
Overlook my 'links' - Overlook your 'observation'.

Brandon - You have the quotient to expand, but appear to be resigned to the bollux, that you were indoctrinated with.

We are both 'foolish' in each others' eyes.
But, I excuse 'folly' when it is born to such.

I hope we can converse, beyond such, one day.

1 Reply

@mark noble,

The fact that you are on a rotating body reduces your effective weight by the amount mv^2/r and v is highest at the equator.

Your explanation is still vague. Give an example of a specific observation, explain how it is relative, what it is relative to, and exactly how the relativity influences the measurement.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

IT'S EXPLAINED IN MY LINKS!
YOU DON'T PARTAKE!
Now stfu. (current-Abbrev-terminology)..

0 Replies

Wow...

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

It has to be frustrating when noone recognizes your genius.

1 Reply

@roger,

Maybe an honorary Nobel would help.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Here's an example.
No matter where I am in this, or any universe - I equate to my dimensions, no more or less.
No matter what forces are abundant - I am the same height, width, breadth and volume.
Go to trough, and drink.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

And fish has something to do with chips.
How heavy is the Earth, please?

0 Replies

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

Here's an example.
No matter where I am in this, or any universe - I equate to my dimensions, no more or less.
No matter what forces are abundant - I am the same height, width, breadth and volume.
Go to trough, and drink.

You said:

mark noble wrote:

'Your' observation makes it 'relative'.
And 'YOU' are its only observer.
Overlook my 'links' - Overlook your 'observation'.

I meant for you to give an example about a particular object on Earth and its weight. That is the subject we were discussing. Give an example about the weight of an object on the Earth and how "your observation makes it relative." Explain how that affects its weight at the equator. I don't understand what you mean by "your observation makes it relative."

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

'You' are the 'only' 'observer'.
Even if 'others' relay their observations to you - 'You' are 'still' the 'only' 'observer' of relayed detail.
The moment your 'dimensions' alter - "You are no longer "You"".
If I were to 'topside' in a high altitude jet - It would appear that I were 'weightless' for a minute or so.
But I would not be - Only the forces acting upon my (You call it 'gravity') being would have altered.
My mass doesn't alter - Therefore 'weight' is dependant on poo (point of observation).

So - You are not heavier at the equator, or anywhere - But from your 'poo', you 'assume' such without understanding that it is/are the insitu-forces that have altered - NOT you.

1 Reply

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

'You' are the 'only' 'observer'.
Even if 'others' relay their observations to you - 'You' are 'still' the 'only' 'observer' of relayed detail.
The moment your 'dimensions' alter - "You are no longer "You"".
If I were to 'topside' in a high altitude jet - It would appear that I were 'weightless' for a minute or so.
But I would not be - Only the forces acting upon my (You call it 'gravity') being would have altered.
My mass doesn't alter - Therefore 'weight' is dependant on poo (point of observation).

So - You are not heavier at the equator, or anywhere - But from your 'poo', you 'assume' such without understanding that it is/are the insitu-forces that have altered - NOT you.

This has nothing to do with your mass "altering." We are living on a rotating body. The speed of rotation is fastest at the equator. If we pretend that we are in non-rotating reference frame, as we always do, then a mysterious force called "centrifugal force" seems to come out of nowhere directed radially outward, but it is really just the fact that the rotation tends to make objects on the Earth fly off. Clearly, you have never taken a physics class. You are not free to just make the stuff up.

1 Reply

When Earth formed 4.6 billion years ago from a hot mix of gases and solids, it had almost no atmosphere. The surface was molten. As Earth cooled, an atmosphere formed mainly from gases spewed from volcanoes. It included hydrogen sulfide, methane, and ten to 200 times as much carbon dioxide as today's atmosphere.
The Earliest Atmosphere - Forces of Change - Smithsonian
forces.si.edu/atmosphere/02_02_01.htmlSmithsonian Institution

Gravity does not extend equal force around the earth.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

You are not free to preach your false-physics either.
Stop lying to folk, just to defend your useless profession.
You Actually believe that Ontario revolves slower than Panama?

1 Reply

@mark noble,

My goodness, Mark. We don't need advanced physics for this idea, just common sense. Of course Ontario revolves slower than Panama. Get your globe out of storage and play with it a while. Spin it with your finger. You can SEE that it is so. Why would you question this?

2 Replies

@TomTomBinks,

TomTomBinks wrote:

My goodness, Mark. We don't need advanced physics for this idea, just common sense. Of course Ontario revolves slower than Panama. Get your globe out of storage and play with it a while. Spin it with your finger. You can SEE that it is so. Why would you question this?

There is a reason why the Kennedy Space Center is in Florida and not, say, Massachusetts....

2 Replies

@DrewDad,

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/8486/where-is-the-optimal-location-to-launch-payloads-to-outer-space

0 Replies

@TomTomBinks,

Are you playing the fool, for a specific reason, Tom?
Quantum entanglement is fascinating (Instantaneous transposition of properties over ANY distance)
This shite, like your post is silly.

And I know, you know it, too.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Whether you stand at the pole/s or the equator - 24 hrs it will take to rotate once.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Like Feynman stated - "Forget the observable experiment', 'Just work it out on paper.'
Einstein debunked........ Again 'spooky' can't be'.

0 Replies

Are we less heavy at the equator?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know