How to distinguish the Free Fall from the Weightlessness

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.
Only2perCent
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 4:36 pm
Contact:

How to distinguish the Free Fall from the Weightlessness

Unread post by Only2perCent »

We can all agree that the most distinct property of the Free Fall is its DIRECTION. Invariably it is "down", i.e. TOWARDS THE CENTER OF GRAVITY. 

Fixed in a free-falling CLOSED SPACE, a video camera registers inside it a state where the objects and people SEEMINGLY do not exert pressure on each other, the state that we inaccurately call "the state of weightlessness".  But are the objects and people in Free Fall indeed weightless? No, they are not! They are falling, for Christ's sake, under the force of gravity with ever-increasing speed usually associated with death and destruction at an abrupt end! One can actually interview a man that has just jumped from a skyscraper, but the inevitability is already written across the man's face, haha.

To convince oneself that the people and objects in Free Fall still have weight, one only needs to observe their interaction. For example, an astronaut who pushed against a much heavier object would fly away with a noticeably higher speed than the object itself, relative to the interior of the ship. Inertia, the tendency of the objects to keep the status quo, comes into play.

IN THE ABSENCE OF WEIGHT, THE OBJECTS DO NOT INTERACT AT ALL. THAT EXCLUDES GRAVITATION TOWARDS EACH OTHER, AS WELL. 

In other words, in the absence of weight, there aren't either PRESSURE, FORCE, MOMENTUM, INERTIA, DIRECTION, ENERGY or anything that we unite by the word "Physics". The astronauts would not be able to breathe in weightlessness, the air would not enter their expanded lungs (remember, there is no pressure), nor would they be able to throw any object. Inter-molecular/atomic forces would stop working. Strictly speaking, the WEIGHTLESSNESS is "physically impossible", DOES NOT EXIST in the material world. 

There is no VOID IN GRAVITY anywhere in the observable Universe, it is not for nothing that the star constellations kept their well-recognizable shapes and positions for millenniums. One may call it "Ether", "Dark Matter", "String", "Providence", "Destiny", etc., but all of that is the old familiar Gravity. An object that managed to break away from the Earth would have to deal with the solar attraction next.
Only2perCent
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 4:36 pm
Contact:

Re: How to distinguish the Free Fall from the Weightlessness

Unread post by Only2perCent »

What NASA sells us as "weightlessness" is the Physics of Free Fall:

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... =Free+Fall

Weightless objects cannot interact - try to throw a mosquito for example, ha-ha. An object without a mass cannot create a momentum necessary for a motion. And that is not all. The weightlessness does not limit itself to the small objects like pens and oranges, the spaceship itself becomes weightless, that invalidates the center-fugal forces argument. Inter-molecular and sub-atomic forces stop working!

Strictly speaking weightlessness is a Physical impossibility. Gravity is what holds everything together. It's another name for God. Without Gravity the Universe would simply disintegrate.

Those who will defend the notion that "astronauts are falling around the Earth" should remember that a fall trajectory can be parabolic, hyperbolic, spiral, but never circular-orbital. That reminds me about another my theory. What we call "horizontal" on Earth is, in fact, circular motion. By going strictly in one direction, one will eventually come back to the starting point. I think our Universe is "spherical", not sphere in a space but folded onto itself. That takes care of the "infinite".

P.S.: There is also an impossible absence of relative rotation in fake videos (ship to video camera, ship to space-station, etc.) - another dead give-away of Media fakery. Inability to make such simple observations speaks volumes about how immovable sheeple's thinking has become.
Post Reply