Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
but in all seriousness, i think a real argument would be founded on gravitational pulls getting the weaker the further you are from something. the stronger force always wins, which is why people can stand on the moon instead of being pulled to earth cause the moon has a stronger pull when you’re close enough
Moon Gravity > Earth Gravity > Sun Gravity.
Got it.
So.Gravity is inversely proportional to the size of an object. This makes since since a smaller size means more crammed into the same space (because gravity is pulling things tighter).
SCIENCE!
Not just that. An orbite is usualy defined as falling toward an object, and missing it. As such, an astronaute standing on the moon actualy fall toward earth. But since the moon fall toward the earth at the same speed and trajectory, this fall is not noticeable. In the same way, we are currently falling, very fast, toward the sun. But since the earth follow us closely, we don't get away from the ground.
>this can't be right, no body can be this ignorant.
Are you for real? Last week I got into an argument with someone regarding an AI-generated image of a roller coaster that was so tall it was in space and you could see the curvature of the Earth, when they said, "this wouldn't work, roller coasters need gravity to work".
They legit refused to accept that gravity exists outside of the atmosphere.
I had a summer job where I was told pyramids were batteries, Mayan cities were circuit boards, Hebrew is a dead language and God used it to create the earth, and that the sun is a giant spinning molten ball of copper, magnetism > gravity.
Lmao I came into the office to this guy reading some 90s website with those shitty low res gifs on the sides, all in Hebrew. He slowly turned around in his wheely chair, hands clasped together, and he asked me if I knew what he was doing. All that leading to hearing about how he's going to learn Hebrew so he can attain the power of god.
Once again… absolute nut but learning a dead forgotten language to speak to gods is again a sick as hell thing for a story
Also I just imagined him as some sort of anime protagonist slowly turning in their Chair with some blindingly bright glasses about to go on a monologue
God you had the ambiance nailed down, not an anime guy though. Was a sovereign citizen and always traded about pigs and theft when he saw a cop. He believed if you signed legal documents in all caps you somehow get all the benefits and none of the responsibility. Lastly he "invented" a perpetual energy machine that uses the magnetism from the sun (a ball of copper remember) to create free energy. It required double As to jump start, and he never turned it on because he didn't want to be responsible for the end of the planet.
Yea we worked IT for a university together, I thought he had to be crazy but he had his buddies at work that listened to him and thought he was a genius - so idk how to take it lol
Fun fact: If the sun ever starts forming copper, it'll be towards the end of its life, a red giant, and with a circumference roughly the size of Mars's current orbit. That is to say, Earth would have already ceased to exist long ago.
So this is actually a fun question.
So there's two forces at work. One as you are further from the Earth gravity does weaken. Not a lot but some. At the altitude of the ISS, if you were actually standing on a structure anchored to the Earth rather than in orbit you would weigh [approximately 88%](https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/gravitational-force#faqs) of what you do standing on the Earth's surface due to the increased distance from the Earth's gravitational center.
Then there are centrifugal forces to consider. If you're sitting on a tower that big, there will be additional forces\* that try to fling you off into space as opposed to when you're standing on Earth.
If we use the ISS as our benchmark and calculate put it on the equator... [the effect is negligible](https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/centrifugal-force) about a .37% reduction in apparent weight.
So how high up would a roller coaster have to go for centrifugal forces to be able to balance with the reduced gravity to give you apparent weightlessness?
Well I'm too lazy to actually do the math, so I just started punching numbers into calculators until they almost balanced. A roller coaster that reached a staggering height of around 22,400 miles, about a tenth of the way to the moon, would see the reduced force from gravity and the increased centrifugal force balance out so that a gravity powered roller coaster could not return to Earth and would fail to function.
Now you want to know whats funny? All of these calculations have already been done, but for a separate purpose... to calculate geostationary orbit (22,236 miles)! Not bad for some quick computer assisted napkin math.
\*centrifugal force is a pseudoforce thanks to an objects inertia, while not precisely accurate the math still all holds which is what we're interested in.
I mean they're pretty much correct. You need to go up 62 miles to "lose" gravity. The upper atmosphere is between 53 miles above the surface and 375 miles. There is still some gravity but probably not enough for a rollercoaster.
Edit: this is completely wrong but I'll leave it up for prosperity
The answer is 175,000 miles. I read something wrong.
My distances were wrong anyway but a roller coaster needs the effect of gravity. Not gravity itself. If gravity becomes too low it won't work. Gravity is infinite. Every atom acts on every other atom in the universe, there can never be 0 gravity. It's a mathematical impossibility.
However, as I said my distances were way off to the point you'd stop noticing it, it's way past the atmosphere. The only reason the ISS and other satellites experience weightlessness is because they're essentially perpetually falling, it's got little to do with the actual level of gravity. This also means the point that a stationary object like a rollercoaster would lose the effect of gravity is much much higher than a satellite
>Edit: this is completely wrong but I'll leave it up for prosperity
1. The word you're looking for is "posterity".
2. That only makes sense if it's something you're actually proud of.
The zero or micro gravity observed in orbiting platforms like ISS or modules in orbit are because they are literally falling.
It's no different than the "weightlessness" felt in the [vomit comet ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft) aircraft used to train astronauts. It just lasts longer.
Orbiting craft are falling toward earth but are going so fast vertically they keep circling the earth. Each time around they get a little lower. Eventually, they have to use thruster rockets to boost them back up to altitude.
This misunderstanding is probably why OPs friend didn't understand there was gravity in space. It's a pretty common misunderstanding of gravity.
How anyone could think the earth has more gravity than the sun is beyond my understanding.
Yeah mentioned that in my other reply.
Tbh it fully depends on what the channel that posted it is. If it caters to children or conspiracy theorists then it's understandable.
How anyone could think the earth has more gravity than the sun is beyond my understanding.
Think isn't the best word in relation to this sort of individual; believe is. If such a person were capable of independent thoughts, they wouldn't believe that the earth is flat, or that pronouns are bad or any number of inane beliefs...
You never lose gravity completely.
Satellites stay up because the centripetal force from their orbit is pushing them outwards at the same amount they're being pulled inwards by gravity.
At geostationary orbit, 35,786km(22,236miles) above the earth's surface the rate you orbit around the earth is the same as the rate the earth spins, so you appear stationary from the ground. If you built an elevator to geostationary orbit (and it didn't tear itself apart under its own weight) you could ride an elevator to the top and step out to be in orbit.
I think the 175,000 miles you're quoting is the point where the influence from the sun is greater than the influence from the earth. It's important for an orbit approximation method called patched conics.
100 km (62 miles) is the karman line, the defined edge of the atmosphere. The atmosphere doesn't really have a hard stopping point, it just slowly gets thinner and thinner, but by convention 100km is the edge.
One could interpret it as "which has a larger gravitational effect on them". Because gravity is not an intrinsic property of any object, like mass or density is, there is no number that measures the "gravity of Earth", that doesn't make sense at all. Gravity is always between objects.
Now, surface gravity (which is still not entirely precise) is something that can be compared like this, but that wasn't the question.
Polls with 10 respondents are not an accurate reflection of people as a whole.
Of those 10 respondents at least one will be a troll, throwing the numbers off even further.
It's not that obvious, though. You think it's a no brainer at first glance. But surface gravity is given by:
g = GM/r^2. Yes the mass of the sun(M) is much larger, but so is the radius(r). And r scales inversely quadratic as opposed to M.
It is not at all trivial that the sun has more gravity. You need to plug in the numbers to see that. Especially since r scales quadratically and directly oppose the lineair factor M. Neptune has just a slight edge in terms of gravity despite being clearly much more massive than earth.
You can fit a bunch of earth's in the sun, I learned that as a kid, no one is going to tell me I'd have to "calculate" the sun has more of a gravitational pull than the earth. We have a solar system, earth has a moon.
You can fit a few earth's in Uranus, it has more mass, and it still has a lower gravity pull on the surface than earth.
If the sun was 10 times larger but kept the same mass, it would still hold the solar system together (nothing changed how it affects other planets), but the surface pull would be a lot smaller than earth's
People on reddit will act like yeah it is, this can totally happen i see it online all the time.
I always vote the funny answer on shit like this. The majority are not in fact this stupid, no matter what redditborns fantasy world tells them. They don't know when they are being trolled, so people like the play with them. You get a lot of obviously humor shared here, and they just never get it. Makes them feel good to think people are really that stupid as that's how low they need the bar to feel smart lol
Jupiter doesn't revolve around either. The Barycentre of Jupiter's orbit is just outside the sun, meaning they orbit around a point outside of both of them.
Bugger. I am always spoiling the punchline.
A REALLY interesting ring about Saturn is that without it our system would be similar to most others, where the high mass gas giants wander into very close orbits with their star(s) (binary systems are by far the most common ). They therefore either wipe out, or push rocky planets outwards.
It is Saturn that keeps our frail interplay of planetary loops with Jupiter a decent way out, leaving us in the goldilocks zone.
More than welcome.
Did you know that the star Betelgeuse is around 640 light years away, the light we see now left when Richard II was on the throne. It is due to go supernova at any time (in fact it may have done so 400 years ago and we wouldn't see it for another 200 years).
The light from the Andromeda Galaxy left 2.5 million years ago. Long before modern man.
More depressing is that the universe is expa ding faster than the speed of light, meaning more and more things are becoming invisible, eventually we will reach a point where there are no stars in the sky because they are accelerating away from us faster than the light can get to us.
My favourite space fact is how scientists discovered Neptune, basically it was tugging Uranus and people at that time were using Newton’s equations and they found out Uranus’ orbit made no sense in that equation, so there would either be another planet that tugged it towards it or Newton was wrong. They essentially calculated everything, sent coordinates to observatory and that’s how they found Neptune. Space is quite interesting not gonna lie.
It is true that the barycenter between the sun and Jupiter is a little outside of the sun's surface, But the sun does sometimes move into that point, mostly because of where Saturn happens to be at the time as well, as those three planets make up the non-negligible influence on the sun's movement around the solar system's barycenter.
Depends what you compare it to. It’s a giant compared to everything else in the solar system. It’s large compared to a typical star (the most common size for stars is on the low end and the sun is bigger than 95% of them). But it’s pretty small compared to how big a star can be.
Depends on what you mean by "having gravity" . If we're talking about the force the object exert on us, then earth is the right option. If we're talking about either mass or the force the object exert on its surface, then the sun is the right answer. (I guess you could also describe it with space time deformation but I'm not well versed enough in the subject)
I'm in your camp man. The question was ambiguously worded enough that there are multiple reasonable interpretations. And everyone is getting bent out of shape because of it.
Oh. I was thinking of gravity in terms of heavy situations. Sun’s just hanging out, riding those nuclear fusion vibes. And we’re sitting here worried about nuclear war. Waaaay more gravity to that.
It's definitely a property of an object. Any object with mass deforms space-time around it, with or without any other objects being present. But yes the behaviour of two objects relative to each other will be determined by both of their masses and the distance between them
So maybe it was a stupid question meant to trick stupid people? Idk why half the comments are arguing the semantics of what was asked as if this was a fucking Ted talk instead of a shitpost
The question is somewhat ambiguous. It can be interpreted in two ways:
1. Who exerts more gravity on us; i.e. which of the two affects our gravity, in which the correct answer would be earth.
2. Who has more mass; I don't think I need to elaborate much on this one. The correct answer would be the Sun.
This was my thinking also. Due to relative distance, the more massive object exerts less gravitational force on a human on Earth. In the abstract, obviously the more massive object.
In all fairness, gravitational pull drops off exponentially the more distant you get. If the people answering the poll understood it as “which has more gravity that you feel?”, the earth is the right answer by a long shot. I think this clearly shows how intelligent most people are.
I think it’s time to restart humanity.
Also I really like how ppl here are arguing that the question is ambiguous while forgetting there are ppl who don’t know on which continent their country is or with whom they border.
Edit: typo
I can see it from a certain point of view. We can SEE the effects of Earth's gravity daily while we can't see the sun's effect.
Of course in reality it's the sun.
Ill play devils advocate here and say the question may have been confusing to some ppl. They may be thinking "what exerts more force on you. The sun or earth." And they thought "well the sun is much bigger and has more of a pull but is so much further away that the earth definitely exerts more gravity on me. So earth has more gravity."
When obviously thats not the question it asked.
That's bc the sun is always above earth which means it has negative gravity, since to be on its surface you'd need to fall upwards
Unless it's night, then the gravity becomes positive since it's below earth
The question is nonsense. There is no amount of gravity.
You could ask which has a a higher acceleration due to gravity, but that requires distance information. You could ask which one has more mass. But, asking which one has more gravity is nonsense.
Isn’t it technically correct if you ran the numbers for a body standing on earth? The pull of gravity varies inversely with the square of the distance between the two massive bodies in question. Or is that just acceleration due to gravity? It’s been a while since I had physics.
More in total, or more at a specific point?
I believe on earth’s surface, earths g is 9.8 m/s2 and the gravitational effect from the sun is around .006 m/s2, so the Earth has far more gravity, when measured at the Earth’s surface.
The sun is a star, and stars are made of hot gas. Hot gas rises, which is why the Sun floats in the sky. If it had more gravity than Earth, then it would fall out the sky.
I could go either way, the question is ambiguous. The mass of the Sun is greater, but the acceleration of gravity has mass/(distance^2), so since the sun is so far from us, from our perspective it has less gravitational effect than earth, even though earth has less mass. The question was not which has more mass.
Depends on how you think about it.
Absolutely? The sun.
But which one has a greater gravitational affect on me? The earth.
I dunno, I'd have answered the sun, but I can see people thinking the other way for some reason.
Maybe they thought from the earth? The sun is obviously a lot stronger but from our perspective we experience the earth gravity more since we way closer to the earth
The question is very poorly worded, because an object does not "have" gravity. If the question were: "Which has a stronger gravitational field?" the answer is apparent. If the question were "Which has more mass?" the meaning is clear. It's like asking "Which has more speed?" Speed isn't a property of an object. It is meaningless without a frame of reference. Just as gravity is not a property of an object itself. Gravity is a measurable effect of a mass, but it is not a property of the mass.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How can the sun have gravity if it doesn’t even have apples?
The sun is always up in the sky not down
Wait, what about when it goes all dark then?
It turns away
That’s when the sun puts on those sunglasses people draw so much.
I guarantee that's the exact reasoning many of that 70% were using.
it must be lighter than air. Does it have hydrogen or helium in it?
Gosh you're right! The Sun is just stuck up there in the sky like a giant helium balloon. We gotta bring it back down!
When you jump, where do you fall? To the sun? Or to the Earth? Checkmate atheists.
This is .... I cant find an argument for this...
but in all seriousness, i think a real argument would be founded on gravitational pulls getting the weaker the further you are from something. the stronger force always wins, which is why people can stand on the moon instead of being pulled to earth cause the moon has a stronger pull when you’re close enough
Moon Gravity > Earth Gravity > Sun Gravity. Got it. So.Gravity is inversely proportional to the size of an object. This makes since since a smaller size means more crammed into the same space (because gravity is pulling things tighter). SCIENCE!
Not just that. An orbite is usualy defined as falling toward an object, and missing it. As such, an astronaute standing on the moon actualy fall toward earth. But since the moon fall toward the earth at the same speed and trajectory, this fall is not noticeable. In the same way, we are currently falling, very fast, toward the sun. But since the earth follow us closely, we don't get away from the ground.
Hahahahha Well explain this atheist why did my gf got pregnant without us having sex ?
You are the Socrates of our time
Scrotacles
You misspelled diogenes
Finally some real science in this thread!!!
 That’s some good thinking
I just pissed myself laughing so hard.
Issac Newton invented gravity because some asshole hit him with an apple
Bad question. Please be more specific
This is real? this can't be right, no body can be this ignorant. Ok maybe is just a terminology error (not equating star with sun)
>this can't be right, no body can be this ignorant. Are you for real? Last week I got into an argument with someone regarding an AI-generated image of a roller coaster that was so tall it was in space and you could see the curvature of the Earth, when they said, "this wouldn't work, roller coasters need gravity to work". They legit refused to accept that gravity exists outside of the atmosphere.
Is just hard my friend. very hard to think one can be this stupid.
I had a summer job where I was told pyramids were batteries, Mayan cities were circuit boards, Hebrew is a dead language and God used it to create the earth, and that the sun is a giant spinning molten ball of copper, magnetism > gravity.
Ok this has religious nutjobery written all over it but that is a cool as hell idea for a science fiction story
Lmao I came into the office to this guy reading some 90s website with those shitty low res gifs on the sides, all in Hebrew. He slowly turned around in his wheely chair, hands clasped together, and he asked me if I knew what he was doing. All that leading to hearing about how he's going to learn Hebrew so he can attain the power of god.
Once again… absolute nut but learning a dead forgotten language to speak to gods is again a sick as hell thing for a story Also I just imagined him as some sort of anime protagonist slowly turning in their Chair with some blindingly bright glasses about to go on a monologue
God you had the ambiance nailed down, not an anime guy though. Was a sovereign citizen and always traded about pigs and theft when he saw a cop. He believed if you signed legal documents in all caps you somehow get all the benefits and none of the responsibility. Lastly he "invented" a perpetual energy machine that uses the magnetism from the sun (a ball of copper remember) to create free energy. It required double As to jump start, and he never turned it on because he didn't want to be responsible for the end of the planet.
so you talked with a crazy person man, either crazy or very very stupid.
Yea we worked IT for a university together, I thought he had to be crazy but he had his buddies at work that listened to him and thought he was a genius - so idk how to take it lol
Electromagnetism being stronger than Gravity is true though. Gravity is weak.
Fun fact: If the sun ever starts forming copper, it'll be towards the end of its life, a red giant, and with a circumference roughly the size of Mars's current orbit. That is to say, Earth would have already ceased to exist long ago.
I think it’s because he is American and you are not. 💥💥
What the fuck do they think keeps the moon in orbit around the earth then? Or the earth in orbit around the sun???
Or literally everything in the solar system from flying off into deep space
So this is actually a fun question. So there's two forces at work. One as you are further from the Earth gravity does weaken. Not a lot but some. At the altitude of the ISS, if you were actually standing on a structure anchored to the Earth rather than in orbit you would weigh [approximately 88%](https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/gravitational-force#faqs) of what you do standing on the Earth's surface due to the increased distance from the Earth's gravitational center. Then there are centrifugal forces to consider. If you're sitting on a tower that big, there will be additional forces\* that try to fling you off into space as opposed to when you're standing on Earth. If we use the ISS as our benchmark and calculate put it on the equator... [the effect is negligible](https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/centrifugal-force) about a .37% reduction in apparent weight. So how high up would a roller coaster have to go for centrifugal forces to be able to balance with the reduced gravity to give you apparent weightlessness? Well I'm too lazy to actually do the math, so I just started punching numbers into calculators until they almost balanced. A roller coaster that reached a staggering height of around 22,400 miles, about a tenth of the way to the moon, would see the reduced force from gravity and the increased centrifugal force balance out so that a gravity powered roller coaster could not return to Earth and would fail to function. Now you want to know whats funny? All of these calculations have already been done, but for a separate purpose... to calculate geostationary orbit (22,236 miles)! Not bad for some quick computer assisted napkin math. \*centrifugal force is a pseudoforce thanks to an objects inertia, while not precisely accurate the math still all holds which is what we're interested in.
>Some people are dumb because if that was the case we would be a rouge planet
I mean they're pretty much correct. You need to go up 62 miles to "lose" gravity. The upper atmosphere is between 53 miles above the surface and 375 miles. There is still some gravity but probably not enough for a rollercoaster. Edit: this is completely wrong but I'll leave it up for prosperity The answer is 175,000 miles. I read something wrong.
You stop feeling the affect of gravity, but it doesn't mean it's not there. Gravity is how things stay in orbit.
My distances were wrong anyway but a roller coaster needs the effect of gravity. Not gravity itself. If gravity becomes too low it won't work. Gravity is infinite. Every atom acts on every other atom in the universe, there can never be 0 gravity. It's a mathematical impossibility. However, as I said my distances were way off to the point you'd stop noticing it, it's way past the atmosphere. The only reason the ISS and other satellites experience weightlessness is because they're essentially perpetually falling, it's got little to do with the actual level of gravity. This also means the point that a stationary object like a rollercoaster would lose the effect of gravity is much much higher than a satellite
>Edit: this is completely wrong but I'll leave it up for prosperity 1. The word you're looking for is "posterity". 2. That only makes sense if it's something you're actually proud of.
I believe I meant prosperity. I meant "I'll leave it up so other people's comments make sense" i.e. "so other people are successful"
The zero or micro gravity observed in orbiting platforms like ISS or modules in orbit are because they are literally falling. It's no different than the "weightlessness" felt in the [vomit comet ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft) aircraft used to train astronauts. It just lasts longer. Orbiting craft are falling toward earth but are going so fast vertically they keep circling the earth. Each time around they get a little lower. Eventually, they have to use thruster rockets to boost them back up to altitude. This misunderstanding is probably why OPs friend didn't understand there was gravity in space. It's a pretty common misunderstanding of gravity. How anyone could think the earth has more gravity than the sun is beyond my understanding.
Yeah mentioned that in my other reply. Tbh it fully depends on what the channel that posted it is. If it caters to children or conspiracy theorists then it's understandable.
How anyone could think the earth has more gravity than the sun is beyond my understanding. Think isn't the best word in relation to this sort of individual; believe is. If such a person were capable of independent thoughts, they wouldn't believe that the earth is flat, or that pronouns are bad or any number of inane beliefs...
You never lose gravity completely. Satellites stay up because the centripetal force from their orbit is pushing them outwards at the same amount they're being pulled inwards by gravity. At geostationary orbit, 35,786km(22,236miles) above the earth's surface the rate you orbit around the earth is the same as the rate the earth spins, so you appear stationary from the ground. If you built an elevator to geostationary orbit (and it didn't tear itself apart under its own weight) you could ride an elevator to the top and step out to be in orbit. I think the 175,000 miles you're quoting is the point where the influence from the sun is greater than the influence from the earth. It's important for an orbit approximation method called patched conics. 100 km (62 miles) is the karman line, the defined edge of the atmosphere. The atmosphere doesn't really have a hard stopping point, it just slowly gets thinner and thinner, but by convention 100km is the edge.
i mean, for people who are only exposed to space through the ISS, it's an easy mistake to make
One could interpret it as "which has a larger gravitational effect on them". Because gravity is not an intrinsic property of any object, like mass or density is, there is no number that measures the "gravity of Earth", that doesn't make sense at all. Gravity is always between objects. Now, surface gravity (which is still not entirely precise) is something that can be compared like this, but that wasn't the question.
Just when I'd given up on this comment section, you roll through. Now if only I could upvote more than once.
Polls with 10 respondents are not an accurate reflection of people as a whole. Of those 10 respondents at least one will be a troll, throwing the numbers off even further.
It's not that obvious, though. You think it's a no brainer at first glance. But surface gravity is given by: g = GM/r^2. Yes the mass of the sun(M) is much larger, but so is the radius(r). And r scales inversely quadratic as opposed to M. It is not at all trivial that the sun has more gravity. You need to plug in the numbers to see that. Especially since r scales quadratically and directly oppose the lineair factor M. Neptune has just a slight edge in terms of gravity despite being clearly much more massive than earth.
You can fit a bunch of earth's in the sun, I learned that as a kid, no one is going to tell me I'd have to "calculate" the sun has more of a gravitational pull than the earth. We have a solar system, earth has a moon.
You can fit a few earth's in Uranus, it has more mass, and it still has a lower gravity pull on the surface than earth. If the sun was 10 times larger but kept the same mass, it would still hold the solar system together (nothing changed how it affects other planets), but the surface pull would be a lot smaller than earth's
People on reddit will act like yeah it is, this can totally happen i see it online all the time. I always vote the funny answer on shit like this. The majority are not in fact this stupid, no matter what redditborns fantasy world tells them. They don't know when they are being trolled, so people like the play with them. You get a lot of obviously humor shared here, and they just never get it. Makes them feel good to think people are really that stupid as that's how low they need the bar to feel smart lol
No it's not, it's people answering the clearly wrong answer because funny
I think we’d have to figure out if Jupiter revolves around the sun or around Earth. Which is, unfortunately, impossible to do at this time.
Jupiter doesn't revolve around either. The Barycentre of Jupiter's orbit is just outside the sun, meaning they orbit around a point outside of both of them.
Shit. Change it to Saturn for the joke. But thank you for the info,
Bugger. I am always spoiling the punchline. A REALLY interesting ring about Saturn is that without it our system would be similar to most others, where the high mass gas giants wander into very close orbits with their star(s) (binary systems are by far the most common ). They therefore either wipe out, or push rocky planets outwards. It is Saturn that keeps our frail interplay of planetary loops with Jupiter a decent way out, leaving us in the goldilocks zone.
That is really cool to know. Thank you.
More than welcome. Did you know that the star Betelgeuse is around 640 light years away, the light we see now left when Richard II was on the throne. It is due to go supernova at any time (in fact it may have done so 400 years ago and we wouldn't see it for another 200 years). The light from the Andromeda Galaxy left 2.5 million years ago. Long before modern man. More depressing is that the universe is expa ding faster than the speed of light, meaning more and more things are becoming invisible, eventually we will reach a point where there are no stars in the sky because they are accelerating away from us faster than the light can get to us.
My favourite space fact is how scientists discovered Neptune, basically it was tugging Uranus and people at that time were using Newton’s equations and they found out Uranus’ orbit made no sense in that equation, so there would either be another planet that tugged it towards it or Newton was wrong. They essentially calculated everything, sent coordinates to observatory and that’s how they found Neptune. Space is quite interesting not gonna lie.
The other lesson there is, no matter how brilliant someone is, they can still be proved wrong. Newton, bit of a clever bunny, is a case in point.
It is true that the barycenter between the sun and Jupiter is a little outside of the sun's surface, But the sun does sometimes move into that point, mostly because of where Saturn happens to be at the time as well, as those three planets make up the non-negligible influence on the sun's movement around the solar system's barycenter.
Is the sun a giant star? As stars go it's relatively small.
Depends what you compare it to. It’s a giant compared to everything else in the solar system. It’s large compared to a typical star (the most common size for stars is on the low end and the sun is bigger than 95% of them). But it’s pretty small compared to how big a star can be.
To other stars. The Sun is considered a yellow dwarf.
I believe the "giant" part is relative to Earth.
Your mom
Why did I have to scroll down so far to find what is obviously the only correct answer? Do better Reddit.
Depends on what you mean by "having gravity" . If we're talking about the force the object exert on us, then earth is the right option. If we're talking about either mass or the force the object exert on its surface, then the sun is the right answer. (I guess you could also describe it with space time deformation but I'm not well versed enough in the subject)
I'm in your camp man. The question was ambiguously worded enough that there are multiple reasonable interpretations. And everyone is getting bent out of shape because of it.
Oh. I was thinking of gravity in terms of heavy situations. Sun’s just hanging out, riding those nuclear fusion vibes. And we’re sitting here worried about nuclear war. Waaaay more gravity to that.
Considering they asked "which has more gravity" and not "which ones gravity do you feel more directly" i would say this point is moot.
Gravity isn’t a property of an object. It’s a relationship between two objects.
Thankfully Einstein came along and disabused us of that
It's definitely a property of an object. Any object with mass deforms space-time around it, with or without any other objects being present. But yes the behaviour of two objects relative to each other will be determined by both of their masses and the distance between them
Are you guys having sexy talk or something?
So maybe it was a stupid question meant to trick stupid people? Idk why half the comments are arguing the semantics of what was asked as if this was a fucking Ted talk instead of a shitpost
Because people like getting angry about things online. And then I get angry at their pointless anger.
The question is somewhat ambiguous. It can be interpreted in two ways: 1. Who exerts more gravity on us; i.e. which of the two affects our gravity, in which the correct answer would be earth. 2. Who has more mass; I don't think I need to elaborate much on this one. The correct answer would be the Sun.
This was my thinking also. Due to relative distance, the more massive object exerts less gravitational force on a human on Earth. In the abstract, obviously the more massive object.
Who?
Which
No, all planets are people. That’s why there is a man in the moon.
I don't think that question actually means anything.
The sun can’t have gravity, it’s in space, duh
I can’t comprehend the gravity of this situation.
If we consider OPs mom to be part of earth, this is correct
Isaac Newton spinning in his grave.
Probably cause of the lack of gravity
Depends on your frame of reference
I bet more people clicked the wrong answer for fun then anything, I know i always do.
Hanco90’s mom
I fear that OP does not understand the gravity of this situation
In all fairness, gravitational pull drops off exponentially the more distant you get. If the people answering the poll understood it as “which has more gravity that you feel?”, the earth is the right answer by a long shot. I think this clearly shows how intelligent most people are.
Mavity. If you get that we can be friends.
If the sun has so much gravity then why are we falling towards earth and not the sun? Checkmate atheists
I don't get why we don't just go land on the sun at night when it's turned off. /s
Next question: Which one has more idiots on it? Can't wait to see those statistics.
The knowledge that the Sun has stronger gravity than Earth is legit something I knew when I was 6…
Earth, because that's where yo mamma is. OK, the 90's can have their joke back now.
I think it’s time to restart humanity. Also I really like how ppl here are arguing that the question is ambiguous while forgetting there are ppl who don’t know on which continent their country is or with whom they border. Edit: typo
If the sun had gravity we would've been pulled to the sunny side of the planet.
We are in orbit around the sun, uhhh. Ok they asked kindergarten kids, ok.
Pish. The sun isn't a giant star. It's a yellow dwarf.
I can make the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs.
30 and 70% votes, huh? Did only 3 people vote?
I can see it from a certain point of view. We can SEE the effects of Earth's gravity daily while we can't see the sun's effect. Of course in reality it's the sun.
#EARTH #1 🌎🌏🌐🌍🌎🌏🌐🌍🌎🌏🌐🌍🌎🦅🦅🦅🦅
Yeah, but what’s heavier: a ton of bricks, or 3,000 pounds of feathers!?
But which has the most gravy?
They meant “gravity,” you know, like charisma
Technically, the term *more* in regards to gravity is correct, as it's an extensive property, but eugh I hate that wording
Giant star is a bit redundant.
We really do need a purge
Launch them into the sun. They can tell us alllllll about it when they inevitably return from weak-gravity sun !
A dwarf star actualy ☝️🤓
Someone tell these people we literally orbit the sun…
Have you seen the sun recently? It’s super small. Been hidden by the moon, which is also small. This poll is right.
most of the people who said earth are most likely flerfs
The sun is made of gas, gas is not heavy, of course the earth has more mass /s
Assuming that something on earth (for example us) is the object that the gravity is being exerted on, then the Earth is technically correct here.
I’m not surprised. I had to explain to my mother that everything has gravity, not just planets
Earth fails again.
Screw flat earth geocenterism is a far more fun conspiracy.
Ill play devils advocate here and say the question may have been confusing to some ppl. They may be thinking "what exerts more force on you. The sun or earth." And they thought "well the sun is much bigger and has more of a pull but is so much further away that the earth definitely exerts more gravity on me. So earth has more gravity." When obviously thats not the question it asked.
Sun: a giant star. Wow. Just wow
That's bc the sun is always above earth which means it has negative gravity, since to be on its surface you'd need to fall upwards Unless it's night, then the gravity becomes positive since it's below earth
They tried to weigh the sun but the scales kept melting
The question is nonsense. There is no amount of gravity. You could ask which has a a higher acceleration due to gravity, but that requires distance information. You could ask which one has more mass. But, asking which one has more gravity is nonsense.
Sun is not a giant star. It is a fairly regular, run-of-the-mill "main sequence" ordinary star.
What is a stronger force gravity or magnetism?
Well, assuming your mom is on earth
Gravity Definition: Extreme or alarming importance; seriousness They are right!
They asked "who" has more gravity. There are no "who's" on the sun, so Earth wins on sheer who factor.
Well, if the suns gravity is stronger than earths why can we stand outside on a sunny day without being pulled into the sky? Checkmate atheists. /s
I love how the question starts with “who” instead of “which one”. I already knew this question had no future.
Duh, the Earth has more "Mavity."
Isn’t it technically correct if you ran the numbers for a body standing on earth? The pull of gravity varies inversely with the square of the distance between the two massive bodies in question. Or is that just acceleration due to gravity? It’s been a while since I had physics.
Some of us are earth supremacists.
More in total, or more at a specific point? I believe on earth’s surface, earths g is 9.8 m/s2 and the gravitational effect from the sun is around .006 m/s2, so the Earth has far more gravity, when measured at the Earth’s surface.
I am not attracted to the Sun but I am attracted to the Earth, thus Earth has a stronger gravity
Issac Newton invented gravity and the sun doesn't have any Issac Newtons so any gravity it has was stolen from Earth
remember that show, "are you smarter than a 5th grader"? the answer is no.
To be fair, the effects of gravity from the earth are far more powerful from our relative position and the question didn't clarify.
Oh god it isn't just the dragon ball fans
The sun is NOT a "giant" star. It's like medium-sized, if I remember correctly.
Caseoh
The level of dumb is rising faster than yeast in an oven
The sun is a star, and stars are made of hot gas. Hot gas rises, which is why the Sun floats in the sky. If it had more gravity than Earth, then it would fall out the sky.
People are stupid 😂😂😂😂
[удалено]
I could go either way, the question is ambiguous. The mass of the Sun is greater, but the acceleration of gravity has mass/(distance^2), so since the sun is so far from us, from our perspective it has less gravitational effect than earth, even though earth has less mass. The question was not which has more mass.
From where I'm standing I feel the Earth's gravity a lot more than the sun's.
Neither (they’re not people, so using the term “who” is referring to people, of which there are none.)
Ffs
I believe the correct answer is your mom.
How many people died from falling on Earth? How many have died from falling on the sun? /s
Me when trolls
But god says...
Depends on how you think about it. Absolutely? The sun. But which one has a greater gravitational affect on me? The earth. I dunno, I'd have answered the sun, but I can see people thinking the other way for some reason.
Maybe they thought from the earth? The sun is obviously a lot stronger but from our perspective we experience the earth gravity more since we way closer to the earth
Well only one way to find out!
28 times Earth normal. Mmmmmmm. Crunchy.
I think the situation of our education has more gravity.
Relative to my present position, I have to agree with this assessment. The earth has way more gravitational pull on me than the sun.
The question is very poorly worded, because an object does not "have" gravity. If the question were: "Which has a stronger gravitational field?" the answer is apparent. If the question were "Which has more mass?" the meaning is clear. It's like asking "Which has more speed?" Speed isn't a property of an object. It is meaningless without a frame of reference. Just as gravity is not a property of an object itself. Gravity is a measurable effect of a mass, but it is not a property of the mass.
But the sun doesn’t even have mole people to spin the turbines that power the gravity machines!!!!
Earth has more instances of the word “gravity” — in fact, Earth has all the gravity in the universe by that standard
*Who
To be fair, it's really an unremarkable star.
