you would be trapped like a spring

>people still doesn't know how gravity doesn't work

If there was a hole like that then the planet would just merge back into a ball because o gravity. Let's say it doesn't then it means the whole planet somehow lost a lot of mass which means that the planet is going to fall to you because your gravity pulls it to you.

If a hole were possible then common sense says jump in ..fall to the center at ever increasing speed past the center slowing down all the way to the outside rim but not quite far enough to grab the rim. Fall back in again and out again loosing a bit each time till stuck in the center.

Falling into a black hole would be different .Falling Falling Falling Faster Faster Faster SPLAT!

I put filings on paper often just to see the pretty patterns

It has nothing to do with the electrical power. Real electric guitars don't have any batteries. The issue could be that the amp is designed to work with the signals from a guitar's pickup, which are probably not the same as the signals from a speaker. If I had to guess, the pickup would be taking the signals from each string individually, while the speaker from this kid's toy is taking the entire sound as a whole.

It's also possible that the teeny-tiny magnet in that speaker just isn't strong enough to send a strong signal. I'm not sure what you could do about this.

the toy generates a signal of a much lower power (higher impedance) than a guitar pickup is expected to, that's why it's very quiet. as for it being "spotty", the most likely reason is that the sound you hear from the toy is largely due to the way the tiny speaker reacts to the incoming "lo-fi" signal. if you take the speaker out of the chain, you'll most likely lose the sound you're presumably trying to capture.

tl;dr - you can find a way to preamplify the signal before it gets to the amp, but it will still be "spotty". better yet, install a mic/pickup next to the toy's speaker.

the poster above is misinformed. passive guitar pickups don't draw current from batteries, they generate it when metal strings vibrate over the magnetic pole pieces of the pickup. it's safe to assume the toy does not have pickups and therefore needs to generate the signal itself by drawing current from the batteries. the toy is only expected to output its sound into a tiny, low-power speaker, so an appropriately low-powered signal is generated, which is too quiet for a guitar amp because of a much higher impedance, and sounds "spotty" because the signal is too "lo-fi" to sound good on a larger speaker.

as for what was said about guitars:
>Real electric guitars don't have any batteries
a lot of electric guitars/basses use 9V batteries, but plenty don't. an active pickup still generates current, but that signal is too low-power to go straight to the amp and needs to first go through the built-in active preamp. active pickups generate a low-power signal which is supposedly easier for the active EQ to handle and makes the signal less noisy (debatable). active pickups can be designed with a particular tonality in mind even if it sacrifices the output - it works because the signal still goes through the preamp on the way out. on a fully passive instrument the pickup itself is responsible for generating enough current to produce a signal of an acceptable level, which often results in a "nice tone vs high output" tradeoff situation. often times the pickup itself is passive, but the battery is needed for the EQ. active EQ can give you independent control of low/mid/high frequencies, whereas passive EQ is generally limited to a treble roll-off. some guy made optical pickups, which uses light emiters and photodetectors. those obviously require batteries.

>the pickup would be taking the signals from each string individually
not strictly wrong, but not exactly true. in most pickups there are separate magnet pole pieces that pick up the vibrations of each string individually, but the signal that the pickup outputs is generally one and the same. there are exceptions, i think it was Roland who made a pickup that output the sound of Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>16401
Try hammering the speakers a bit
Usually the sound is just hidden inside and you need a little force to yank it out

h

You find what to be an inferior path? Science or being a flat-earther?

No flat Earth theory is capable of explaining all phenomena that we observe:
1. On a flat Earth there would be no horizon. There would be nothing stopping you from looking at Europe from the coast of North America, provided you were high up enough and had a potent enough telescope. Ships just past the edge of the horizon would not appear to sink. Telecomminications over long distances would be much easier; the whole point of satellites is that you can use them to transmit radio signals of (more or less) any frequency over the horizon. Radio over the horizon is possible, by bouncing the signal over the top layers of the atmosphere, but it requires specific frequencies, and specific conditions that aren't always available.
2. No flat Earth theory has ever put forth a serious description of celestial mechanics for the Solar System. Even something as simple as the distance between the Earth and the Sun, and the Earth and the Moon, let alone explanations for things such as apparent retrograde motion. Some descriptions actually require the sun to be quite small and quite close to the Earth, or else that its light cone be really narrow for some reason.
3. Midnight sun at both the South and North Poles at opposite ends of the year. The geometry proposed by the Flat Earth Society precludes midnight sun in the souther hemisphere.
4. Commercial flights between South America and Australia are polar routes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PolarRoute.png
(There's fewer routes because there's less land in the Southern Hemisphere, so landmasses are further apart.)
Again, the FES geometry can't explain this. That geometry implies that the shortest route from South America to Australia is North-bound, and it would be impossible in a single hop.
5. The stars in the sky appear to rotate around two points: one above each Pole. On a flat Earth, they would either have to be stationary or else rotate around a single point at one Pole; at the opposite Pole they would appear to rotate quite fast (tangential speed twice that observe at the equator).
6. Tides are incomprehensible if you assume the Earth is flat.
7. Invariably a flat Earth theory requires a conspiracy to hide the true shape of the Earth, but no one can ever put forth a rational motivation for the conspiracy ("for the evulz" isn't rational), let alone actual evidence that it actually exists.

File 155949765995.jpg - (35.80KB , 640x702 , o9o4Gnw2jynB19bDfdrftBiciDyF_D_uiUeuEvVDP04.jpg )

I find you to be "inferior life".

>Science failed to convince
it's not science's job to convince the ignorant or the foolish.

>>16652
Who cares? Homophobes causes much more problems than the opposite.

>>16577
wow faggots

>>16039
There probably are many homosexuals whose preference could be attributed to divergent fetal development, but given how subjectively humans are able to perceive reality, it's just as likely many homosexuals are simply more interested in their own sex.

In the end, whether you consider it to be brain damage or the whims of the heart doesn't matter; we have not yet developed the technology to ensure the masculization process completes nor have we developed the science to fully account for the subjective differences in people's worldviews. The former we may achieve at some point, but the latter is inherently impossible.

Someday (rather soon), we're going to have Gattica-style designer babies, but we will never "cure" homosexuality.