Monthly Physics Competition Questionnaire

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AnTiFreeze3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Competition Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a monthly physics competition question regarding the phenomenon of objects falling towards the Earth. Participants explore various interpretations and explanations for this question, engaging in a mix of philosophical, conceptual, and humorous responses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Humorous

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the reason objects fall is due to gravitational forces, with one stating that both objects exert gravitational forces on each other.
  • Others humorously propose that the phenomenon is a result of philosophical or nonsensical reasoning, such as attributing it to "the will of Satan" or claiming that "nothing falls towards each other."
  • A few participants argue that the Earth is falling towards the objects instead of the other way around.
  • One participant mentions that the perception of falling is a construct of the mind, implying a more abstract interpretation of the question.
  • There are discussions about the appropriateness of using mathematics in answers, with some asserting that all answers should be devoid of math.
  • Several humorous references are made to pop culture figures, such as Kate Upton, in the context of finding beauty rather than scientific explanations.
  • Participants express uncertainty about how to explain gravitational forces without relying on Newtonian physics, given the context of the competition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the explanation for why objects fall towards the Earth. Multiple competing views and interpretations remain, with some participants engaging in humorous banter while others attempt to provide more serious explanations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express limitations in their understanding of physics, particularly regarding non-Newtonian explanations of gravitational forces. The discussion also reflects a playful tone, with references to philosophical ideas and pop culture.

  • #31
WannabeNewton said:
Needs more ##\nabla_a##

Dat ##\nabla##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
micromass said:
Dat ##\nabla##
It's the answer to everything according to 2001 Space Odyssey.
 
  • #33
WannabeNewton and micromass have both disregarded the rules of this competition by posting twice, after I allowed them to post only once, and have therefore forfeited the prize.
 
  • #34
AnTiFreeze3 said:
WannabeNewton and micromass have both disregarded the rules of this competition by posting twice, after I allowed them to post only once, and have therefore forfeited the prize.
Ain't nothin' but a thang.
 
  • #35
PhizKid said:
Prove that there is such thing as a gravitational force without using any Newtonian physics or descendants thereof (since Principia is the prize)

but I know physics only upto Newtonian level, so I explained on the basis of the knowledge which I have at the moment
 
  • #36
Viru.universe said:
but I know physics only upto Newtonian level, so I explained on the basis of the knowledge which I have at the moment

But you can't use Newtonian physics since that's the prize he's giving away!
 
  • #37
micromass said:
But you can't use Newtonian physics since that's the prize he's giving away!

well then I guess I'll try after a couple of years after learning some new stuff
 
  • #38
Everyone broke the rules, so no one gets the prize. I think I'll buy the book anyway and use it as a doorstop or something.
 
  • #39
AnTiFreeze3 said:
Everyone broke the rules, so no one gets the prize. I think I'll buy the book anyway and use it as a doorstop or something.
I happen to have a copy that I inherited from my uncle, zoobyinsole, when he passed away 85 years ago. Your doorstop idea is about the best use for it. A quick read through revealed the plot is beyond soporific, the characters are completely 2 dimensional, and the illustrations are like some sort of proto-cubism, all geometric and abstract. There's a lot of talk about the attraction of this body for that body, but none of the romances ever goes anywhere. It's no wonder it has never been made into a movie.

Incidentally, he says the bodies are attracted by the mysterious power of hypothesis non fingere. I think that's some sort of achemist's love potion, but I'm not sure.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K