Mathematician destroy Evolution in 5 Min

[JBeukema]

none of the total gives rise to velocity through acceleration.

Its velocity doesn't increase as it accelerates? Is not the very definition of acceleration 'an increase in velocity or change in its direction'?

 

[antagon]

but that's quite different from what i'm saying. the gravitational force is greater when more mass is added by either gravitor. the inertia from any one of the gravitors is what makes the rates of acceleration from the resultant attraction the same for that gravitor and any other relative to a mutual object.

the inertia balance from the acceleration equation is the key observation.

So, since Earth and Luna both have sufficient inertia for to remain more or less unaffected by the hammer or feather, it's only the inertia, mass, etc of the hammer and feather that we need be concerned about, yes?

yeah. kinda.

i prefer to distill the situation to ideals: given a perfect, non-magnetic sphere not it motion and acting in an absolute vacuum, the control gravitator, with the mass of the earth and a given radius, any two such spheres of identical radius, but different masses, say of a hammer and a feather, respectively, will elapse the same time if introduced independently from the same distance, when measuring the duration of their travel from introduction to contact with the control gravitator.

that way, the statement on the laws at work is absolute, and deviation could be attributed to flaws in the experiment, rather than the presumption it is based on.

So what you're saying is that as mass increases, the increase in inertia is equal to the increase in gravitational attraction the object possesses? That's why the hammer and the feather fall at the same rate when under the influence of the same third object (gravitator)?

quite similar, but that the mass of an object determines both the force of gravitation with another and its inertia. rather than 'is equal to', 'is equal and opposite to' specifically with regard to determining its acceleration under gravitation.

However, while both Luna and Earth both possess sufficient gravitational attraction to overcome the inertia of the hammer and the feather, Earth's stronger pull, being stronger, causes greater acceleration in both the hammer and the feather as they are attracted to it, compared to Luna. Hence any two objects that are small enough so as to not over come the inertia of a third-party gravitator will, in a vacuum and under the influence of no other forces, gravitate towards that third-party gravitator with equal acceleration to eachother, and that rate is determined by the strength of the gravitator's attraction, the gravitational effects of the lesser bodies being nullified as they continuously overcome their own inertia during acceleration towards the gravitator?

yeah. on overcoming, i remind that this is not total, and that the feather does act on the earth. it is also equally and oppositely forcing the earth toward it, albeit negligibly.

 

[JBeukema]

Ah. My mistake was not being aware that the overcoming of its own inertia was equal and opposite to [what I meant by 'equal to', as I hope was clear from the context] the increase in attraction, effectively nullifying it.

Would it be correct to state that, if the feather is 'chasing' the Earth as both objects move in the same direction, the feather will slow the earth ever so slightly [in reality, to such a negligible extent that it is effectively null for all intents and purposes], as the gravitation acts against but cannot overcome (in total or to any meaningful degree) the Earth's inertia,and that such interplays, as complex as they can become, ultimately govern systems such as our Solar System and other interactions between multiple bodies in motion?

 

[antagon]

absolutely. i'd say the earth bobbles weekly as the moon orbits it, and the sun bobbles as the planets orbit. the equal and opposite function is central to the universe, planets or quarks.

 

[antagon]

none of the total gives rise to velocity through acceleration.

Its velocity doesn't increase as it accelerates? Is not the very definition of acceleration 'an increase in velocity or change in its direction'?

there is an increase, but it is irrespective to mass for the purposes of gravitation. mass piles on mass via momentum, rather than velocity via acceleration, with regard to free-fall.