A ? of force.

[theorist-constant12345]

"Melons mechanics" is word salad. You should have just said it puts an inwards pressure on the melon.

Pressure. Just pressure.

Just pressure, passed

You are getting too many levels of forces involved! Next we will be talking about atomic and nuclear charges.

Gravity is a centripetal force and it does result in an increasing pressure toward the center of a gravitationally significant mass. But the pressure in that instance is not itself a centripetal force.

Maybe, maybe not, I can not see a difference personally in the bands force been equal to inward pressure.

On that note , I have to spend time with my family, it is that time of year where the fallacy of Santa costs families lots of money, and gives the already rich , even more riches, Happy festive season to the rich people.
I thank you for the great conversation members in this thread.

 

[Amar Nath Reu]

IMHO, centripetal simply means towards the center.

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Up and down are arbitrary, and at the present time of our visual Universe, the only direction at present to reality is either expanding away from a center of gravity, or trying to contract to the center of a gravity?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Well, thread has been moved and heading to the pit , according to science my question<s> , have been answered. I do not see any answers except one of a no, to my question.
I think science again has missed an important point, that mass has a limit to size, because if the centripetal force applied by greater force imposed by a greater density of mass inwards on the core, there is more pressure on the core, and Implosion has a maximum limit of force allowed before implode.

On that note never mind, more time wasted trying to explain something you will never understand.

Thread ended yet again because no one wants to talk about proper science.

 

[theorist-constant12345]

So in which part of this diagram of the melon are you saying does not happen?

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Edit tag missing.

 

[origin]

Well, thread has been moved and heading to the pit , according to science my question<s> , have been answered. I do not see any answers except one of a no, to my question.[

What is happening is quite simple. The rubber bands are causing a compression of the skin of the melon. This raises the internal pressure of the melon. When enough rubber bands are added the internal pressure of the melon exceeds the strength of the skin of the melon. The top of the melon splits releasing the internal pressure. The sudden decrease in pressure allows the rubber bands to contract splitting the melon in half.

I think science again has missed an important point, that mass has a limit to size, because if the centripetal force applied by greater force imposed by a greater density of mass inwards on the core, there is more pressure on the core, and Implosion has a maximum limit of force allowed before implode.

This does not make any sense. There is no centripetal force. Here is the definition of centripetal force from Merriam-Webster.

"the force that is necessary to keep an object moving in a curved path and that is directed inward toward the center of rotation".

So clearly there is no centripetal force involved in the video

On that note never mind, more time wasted trying to explain something you will never understand.
Thread ended yet again because no one wants to talk about proper science.

It is not a matter of understanding. The issue is that you are using terms incorrectly and missing the actual science involved with the video. The short explanation I wrote is what is going on in the video.

 

[Russ_Watters]

On that note never mind, more time wasted trying to explain something you will never understand.

Thread ended yet again because no one wants to talk about proper science.

If you put some effort into learning instead of arguing about the questions you are asking, it would probably go better and you wouldn't waste our time.

 

[Dywyddyr]

If you put some effort into learning instead of arguing about the questions you are asking, it would probably go better and you wouldn't waste our time.

Not learning is one of his defining characteristics.

 

[Randwolf]

Gravity is a centripetal force and it does result in an increasing pressure toward the center of a gravitationally significant mass. But the pressure in that instance is not itself a centripetal force.

Take the case of two isolated massive bodies that are not rotating nor in orbit about any point, including each other - i.e. they are momentarily "stationary". Do they exhibit gravitational pull on each other? If so, where is the centripetal force in this example?

Gravity acts as a centripetal force in the case of rotation or orbital motion, such as a planet about a sun, no?[/I]

 

[OnlyMe]

Take the case of two isolated massive bodies that are not rotating nor in orbit about any point, including each other - i.e. they are momentarily "stationary". Do they exhibit gravitational pull on each other? If so, where is the centripetal force in this example?

You have set up a hypothetical involving two isolated sources of gravitation.., suggesting that they do not act on eachother.., and then asked if they act on eachother..?

If you are asking if two isolated sources of gravitation can exist without interacting — only if they are located further from one another than the 13.8 +/- billion light years we believe there has been since the Big Bang.

Closer than than that, and assuming they alone exist in this new universe, they must be in orbit about eachother and thus there is a centripetal force... Under the common use of the word.

Gravity acts as a centripetal force in the case of rotation or orbital motion, such as a planet about a sun, no?

Yes! But in the case of gravitation, does the force potential still exist even where there are no objects in orbit? If if so, does it still not act toward the center of mass?... And thus is it not yet a center seeking force?

What the word means and how it is used...

The word was first used probably sometime in the mid 1600's and perhaps by Newton (probably easy enough to Google but I am lazy). It was used to describe a center seeking force associated with curved orbits. But again does that mean that in the abscence of an orbiting object there is no center seeking force? Or that we just most commonly refer to gravity as gravity, in such cases.

Gravity is a center seeking force but not the only force that the word can accurately be applied to.

 

[billvon]

I will ask again, if it is not centripetal force being imposed inwards by the elastic bands , then what force is it?

A mechanical force known as tension.

The elastic bands add inward force to the Melon, the molecules of the melon are contracting inwards to make a greater intensity of force

In the video they clearly end up moving OUTWARDS.

P.s - gravity is centripetal force, gravity is not based by rotation qualities.

Gravity is not centripetal force. Centripetal force is centripetal force.

 

[OnlyMe]

Gravity is not centripetal force. Centripetal force is centripetal force.

That is not entirely true. While the term centripetal force is not exclusive to a discussion of gravity, that is where it began...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_centrifugal_and_centripetal_forces

"Isaac Newton coined the term "centripetal force" (vis centripita) in his discussions of gravity in his 1684 De Motu Corporum."​

 

[theorist-constant12345]

Not learning is one of his defining characteristics.

Not learning, you are serious presuming a lot, at least I understand gravity and the subjects I talk about.

Tension of the bands is NOT the reaction to the bands of the Melon, I am going to be arrogant and say get that into some of your thick heads, centripetal is contracting force, centrifugal is expanding force, motion is another force, do I need to explain basic principles of science to some of you?

I will quote this -

''What is happening is quite simple. The rubber bands are causing a compression of the skin of the melon. This raises the internal pressure of the melon. When enough rubber bands are added the internal pressure of the melon exceeds the strength of the skin of the melon. The top of the melon splits releasing the internal pressure. The sudden decrease in pressure allows the rubber bands to contract splitting the melon in half.''

What is happening is not quite simple, it is forces acting on a molecular level , the atoms in the melon under pressure by the tension of the bands causing inwards force, causing two atoms can not occupy the same space and because there is no north or south force applied, the center atoms need to move somewhere.

I give up truly, I really think science is stupid has it is, and science really understands very poorly .

Edit quote - What is happening is quite simple. The gravity is causing a compression of the skin of the Earth. This raises the internal pressure of the Earth. When enough gravity are added the internal pressure of the Earth exceeds the strength of the skin of the Earth. The top of the Earth splits releasing the internal pressure. The sudden decrease in pressure allows the gravity to contract splitting the Earth in half.

But of cause the melon means nothing, and I am just a clueless troll....sarcasm.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Not learning, you are serious presuming a lot

How many more times: you CONSISTENTLY show that you don't learn.

at least I understand gravity and the subjects I talk about.

And you CONSISTENTLY show that this isn't true.

Tension of the bands is NOT the reaction to the bands of the Melon

Try learning to read. That doesn't resemble ANYTHING I wrote.

The sudden decrease in pressure allows the rubber bands to contract splitting the melon in half.

If there was a "decrease in pressure" then the rubber bands wouldn't contract any more.

The top of the Earth splits releasing the internal pressure. The sudden decrease in pressure allows the gravity to contract splitting the Earth in half.

Utter unmitigated crap.

I am just a clueless troll

You FINALLY got something right.

 

[theorist-constant12345]

How many more times: you CONSISTENTLY show that you don't learn.


And you CONSISTENTLY show that this isn't true.


Try learning to read. That doesn't resemble ANYTHING I wrote.


If there was a "decrease in pressure" then the rubber bands wouldn't contract any more.


Utter unmitigated crap.


You FINALLY got something right.

I think your has bin is not really of interest any more to anyone, you have proved how clueless you actually are. You know and understand very little.

When the Ice melts at the poles do not come crying to me, when the Earth switches its density mass function, and the pressure shift implodes the Earth like the Melon.

You know nothing.

 

[OnlyMe]

Tension of the bands is NOT the reaction to the bands of the Melon, I am going to be arrogant and say get that into some of your thick heads, centripetal is contracting force, centrifugal is expanding force, motion is another force, do I need to explain basic principles of science to some of you?

The rubber bands do not do not act as a centripetal force. Which means they do not create a center seeking force. They compress the melon around what could very loosely be associated with equitorily... But that is not the same as the case of gravity as a centripetal force.

Somehow it seems you are getting stuck on the idea that pressure is a force itself. While pressure can exert force, or transfer force, it is as far as I can think of, itself the result of some other action/force.

Even in the case of the rope and bucket, while the rope causes the bucket to swing round in a circle, it is no more a center seeking force than the rubber sheet is gravity, in the rubber sheet and bowling ball analogy.

Centripetal is not contracting in the manner you think. It is not just compression. It is a Newtonian concept of a force that attracts an object toward a center of mass and is used to explain orbital exceleration associated with a change in direction and a constant velocity.

A better question/challenge might be, Name a center seeking force other than gravity.

 

[OnlyMe]

That is not entirely true. While the term centripetal force is not exclusive to a discussion of gravity, that is where it began...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_centrifugal_and_centripetal_forces

"Isaac Newton coined the term "centripetal force" (vis centripita) in his discussions of gravity in his 1684 De Motu Corporum."​

On second thought, I guess I should reconsider the implications above and repeat,

A better question/challenge might be, Name a center seeking force other than gravity.​

 

[theorist-constant12345]

On second thought, I guess I should reconsider the implications above and repeat,

A better question/challenge might be, Name a center seeking force other than gravity.​

gravity is not a center seeking force, gravity is that all mass is attracted to mass, the center seeking force is the density function of mass, all atoms are by nature attracted to each other, whilst the electron is held by the proton, the proton and electrons are attracted to other electrons and protons, opposite polarities attract.
- is attracted to +, in a single atom, and also the - and + in a single atom is attracted to other atoms, this is what gravity is.

In a vacuum two atoms will attract each other, then all other atoms build up the density , the denser the mass the more gravity, so in a central position, it not that things are attracted to the center, but things are attracted to the greater density of mass.

You can clearly see the content in the Cavendish experiment.

The lesser energy of the mass, <the smaller ball>, attracted to the greater energy. E=mc2 not only being the energy contained within a mass volume and density, it is the function of gravity.

Fn=0 on a static object on the ground is not true, E=mc2 is being lost by the attraction of atoms to atoms, and the loss of energy from mass is to a density containing more E=mc2 than the singular mass.

The lesser energy is always attracted to the greater energy.

 

[Dr_Toad]

Lost. Shambling around in his empty skull like an insane ghost. Sad.