No that's not the flat earth explanation for gravity, that's the controlled oppositions attempt at discrediting flat earth with a straw-man. Gravity is a fallacy invented to explain the orbits of the fake ball planets they claim are solid objects flying around in their fake vacuum space. None of the forces they attribute to gravity here on earth require gravity as an explanation for their cause.
OK, I'll bite. Explain the flat earth explanation for gravity. Why does the apple fall from the tree?
I'll answer your question but first you have to explain why a helium balloon rises up into the sky when you let go of the string? Then you have to explain why the apple has to play by a different set of rules?
Balloons rise in the atmosphere due to hydrostatic pressure (i.e. lighter fluids rise when immersed in heavier ones), but a balloon in space doesn't rise. Balloons released on Earth won't reach outer space because the force of lift will eventually reach equilibrium with the force of gravity. Hydrostatic pressure applies to fluids, but the density of interstellar gasses is so low in space that they behave like individual particles (which is why balloons won't rise in space). Apples are too dense and heavy to gain lift from hydrostatic pressure. So, apples fall when dropped because of gravity, and because they aren't buoyant in the atmosphere like balloons are. Balloons are subject to gravity, too, but this doesn't become as obvious until balloons reach an altitude at which the atmosphere is so thin that the lift generated from hydrostatic pressure is overcome by the force of gravity. In a vacuum affected by a gravitational field, a helium balloon would actually fall; this is because gravity still affects it, but hydrostatic pressure doesn't.
It will stop rising when the density of the atmosphere reaches that of the helium in the balloon. We haven't even reached this mythical vacuum space you talk about before it stops that is if it hasn't already popped which is unlikely. Then you invoke the magical force of gravity but why? This unpoppable balloon has stopped rising due to the atmosphere it's displaced being the same density as the helium. Then you go on to mention the fantasy of interstellar space; this isn't even relevant. As for the apple it falls because it's denser than air and again you invoke the magical force of gravity for no reason.
You accuse me of intellectual dishonesty yet your statements here show that you're an outright intellectual fraud.
PSo, it's all density, eh?
Here's a question for you then, and I'll even play by your rules: In simulated anti-gravitational environments, such as when an airplane dips at a given speed and angle such that everything is floating around (actually, they're just in free-fall) in an air-filled chamber -- you know, just like the videos you almost surely believe NASA creates to fool us into believing that astronauts are in outer space -- how do you explain that everything in the plane is *floating*? In other words, if both the air and all objects in the air-filled chamber are descending at the same speed relative to each other, why doesn't density separate the more-dense objects (like people) from the air in the chamber?
The problem for you is that hydrostatic pressure decreases in weightless (NOT sparce) environments. If it didn't, then in the descending airplane that causes all things inside it to free-fall, all of the objects that are more dense than the air would fall to the floor of the plane, even in free-fall conditions.
1) Mass + gravity --> weight --> hydrostatic pressure --> balloons rise, apples fall
2).Mass + no gravity --> weightlessness --> no hydrostatic pressure -->
balloons and apples behave similarly3) Density = mass/volume. That's it. Density is dependent upon mass, but is independent of weight which is integral to hydrostatic pressure. We can see this from free-fall airplanes in which all objects are weightless in their environment; it doesn't matter how much mass or density the objects have, they all have no weight. This gives us two scenarios to consider -- we see how objects behave in weightless environments (such as free-fall planes), and also in weighted environments (such as on Earth's surface). Does density explain both scenarios? No. What does? Gravity.
By the way, the formula for weight is w=mg where m=mass and g=Freefall acceleration of gravity. In a freefall airplane, g=0, so w=0.
So you're saying a helium balloon will float around in the middle of the vomit comet ("artificial zero-gravity" airplane ride) with the apple?
To answer your question the force caused by the plane dropping counters the force due to the apples density thereby causing it to float. A balloon on the other hand should rise up faster than normal due to the additional force.
Also, NASA does fake all their space walks in their fake space. You can see air bubbles rising, scuba tanks in the background and various items floating up in their "official" videos. It's not a matter of "belief" as you put it.
Yes, an apple and a helium balloon will both float around in a vomit comet, or in an elevator freefalling at terminal velocity, etc. A helium balloon won't rise above other objects because all objects under these conditions are weightless. Density doesn't matter; objects are equally dense in both a vomit comet and on the ground. There is no force of density. But weight *is* equal to a force. This has nothing to do with bubbles.
Not only are you wrong, you're completely Looney Toons and living in a total fantasy world.
If you think so, you have one simple way to show it: what is the formula for weight using density as a variable? Hint: There isn't one.
Fuck off with the straw-man dude, weight is defined using the "magical" gravitational acceleration variable 'g'. Mass however can be calculated simply by volume * density.
Correct, mass=volume * density, but that doesn't explain why objects float in a vomit comet but don't on the surface of the Earth. The volume and density of an object remain the same regardless of whether its in a vomit comet or on Earth's surface, and thus so does its mass. This means something else must explain why objects float in a vomit comet, but not on Earth.
Slinky floats on the surface of the earth:
This has nothing to do with what we were talking about. But that would be your common tactic: "Shit, I can't explain floating objects in freefall, let's talk about bubbles!" Or, "Shit! I can't explain weight in terms of density, so I'll just move onto something irrelevant, like slinkies."
Although the explanation for the slinky is different, that explanation still has nothing to do with its density, but does have to do with gravity. The slinky's natural tendency is to remained coiled; when you stretch out a slinky, it wants to revert back to its coiled shape. When you hold a slinky in the air and release it, the top of the slinky falls at the rate of acceleration of gravity, which means the bottom of the slinky will experience an *upward* force at the rate of acceleration of gravity. But, at the same time, the bottom of the slinky still wants to go downward as a result of gravity. The upward force cancels out the downward force, and -- voila! -- the bottom of the slinky appears to float. Once the slinky reverts back to its original coiled shape, the upward force no longer acts on the bottom of the slinky, and so the entire slinky falls and hits the ground.
You can't explain what happens to the slinky with density.
look up the recreation of the ancient greek antikythera mechanism or produce working scale models of either sphere or hollow earth, now thats what will cost 
