actually even if the two objects were dropped side by side I think the heavier object would still converge with the Earth faster (assuming the Earth and the two objects are perfect spheres). There would be a triangle effect. Two lines from the center of the Earth directly to the centers of the...
From my understanding, uncertainty theory only says that we would be unable to measure the position and momentum of a particle with enough precision to predict its future. But this doesn't mean that the future isn't predetermined and that all particles don't act in a domino-like manner.
if an object is stationary and suddenly everything else in the universe is vanished then you couldn't tell if the object was stationary or moving.
if an object is moving at a constant velocity and suddently everything else in the universe is vanished then you couldn't tell if the object was...
Heavier objects fall faster...myth or fact?
(I'm not too good with history so correct me if I'm wrong.)
pre-gallileo this is what people generally assumed. Gallileo actually did some experiments to show that all objects fall at the same acceleration. Then Newton provided the math and it was...
the more mass, the more gravity. I thought it would be logical to extend this so that... the more mass, the more gravity, the more gravitational force. I think I'm just lost as to the true meaning of Fgrav.
I don't really understand how something can have more gravity but less gravitational force.
so is there any real significance to the fact that F is different even though the mass of m1 and m2 in both examples add up to the same?
I understand that gravity = a = G*m1/r^2 I think I am more confused about what F is really representative of.
I'm no physicist but this really doesn't make sense to me.
Simple Newtonian physics says that gravity is dependant on mass and that an object with more mass will have more gravity, right?
well here's an equation I'm sure most of you are familiar with...
F = G*m1*m2/r^2
heres my...