B Allegedly "debunking" the Cavendish Experiment

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter DarthOblivious
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flat earth
AI Thread Summary
The Cavendish experiment remains valid and has not been debunked, as it can still be replicated today. A recent attempt to challenge it was dismissed as pseudoscience, primarily due to flawed comparisons between unrelated scientific values. The discussion emphasized that engaging with flat Earth proponents is often futile, as they tend to distrust established evidence. The original claims were deemed to lack a basic understanding of physics. Overall, the thread reinforced the integrity of the Cavendish experiment against unfounded criticisms.
DarthOblivious
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Someone showed me this and I wanted to know everything that's wrong about it.
A flatearther sent this to me a few months ago. Dude actually thought this... "project" would convince me. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories at all, but my knowledge of science is very, very modest, so I can't personally scrutinize it properly. Would anyone be kind enough to help?

EDIT: Forgot the link, lol:
(link removed by mentor: non-accredited journal)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a waste of time analysing such things as they are generally nonsense.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and DarthOblivious
Welcome to PF.

The Cavendish experiment has NOT been debunked, and can be repeated today.

That is a list of possible distractions that, then and now, play no part in the experiment. The list was constructed by a non-scientist, acting as devil's advocate, with the aim of muddying the water of science, with pseudo-science.
 
  • Like
Likes DarthOblivious and PeroK
Any work that seriously compares two values with different dimensions (Newton's ##G## and whatever nonsense Spear's ##Ge## is supposed to be) and declares them "very close" can safely be dismissed as the work of a clueless poser. Is 1m "very close to" 1kg? Is 1km "very close to" 1kg? What does it even mean to compare a distance to a weight? If it didn't occur to anybody involved in the publication of that paper to ask the equivalent question about ##G## and ##Ge##, nobody involved has even the most basic grasp of physics.
 
  • Informative
Likes DarthOblivious
Don't waste your time arguing with a flatearth person. They will simply not trust your evidence and conclude its all a conspiracy theory to hide the flatness of the Earth.

Closing thread, thanks to everyone who contributed here.
 
  • Like
Likes DarthOblivious and Drakkith
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
65
Views
10K
Replies
13
Views
4K
Back
Top