What evidence would have been needed to contradict the theory of gravity before it was proven to be a law?(1 point)%0D%0AResponses%0D%0A%0D%0AExperiments demonstrating that objects of different masses fall at different rates in a vacuum.%0D%0AExperiments demonstrating that objects of different masses fall at different rates in a vacuum.%0D%0A%0D%0AConsistent measurements showing that the gravitational constant varies significantly on Earth.%0D%0AConsistent measurements showing that the gravitational constant varies significantly on Earth.%0D%0A%0D%0AObservations of objects floating upwards without any external force.%0D%0AObservations of objects floating upwards without any external force.%0D%0A%0D%0ADiscovery of a force stronger than gravity that acts universally on all matter.

Answer 1

To contradict the theory of gravity before it was proven to be a law, the following evidence would have been necessary:

1. Experiments demonstrating that objects of different masses fall at different rates in a vacuum. - If this were true, it would contradict Galileo's findings that all objects fall at the same rate regardless of mass in the absence of air resistance.

2. Consistent measurements showing that the gravitational constant varies significantly on Earth. - This would challenge the universality of the gravitational force as a constant in Newton's law of gravitation.

3. Observations of objects floating upwards without any external force. - This would indicate a violation of the principle of gravity, as it suggests that there is an upward force acting on the objects.

4. Discovery of a force stronger than gravity that acts universally on all matter. - If such a force were found, it would provide an alternative explanation for the behavior of objects under gravity and challenge the theory of gravitational attraction.

All of these points could potentially contradict the established theory of gravity if strong enough evidence were presented.