in other words no acceleratin in the center of earth and less acceleration in a mineshaft. Also no acceleration inside a hollow sphere. Hope that clears something up.

That's not true. You yourself just proved it by saying "less acceleration ina mineshaft".

bohm: thank you and we remember that acceleration is equivalent to the pull of gravity.

Finding someone to agree that you are wrong doesn't make you right. You've still a ton of math you said you could show that, as far as you shown, you don't even comprehend.

Unless, of course, you can show that math.

Follow the the graph line of the strength of the gravitational pull from the maximum at the surface (if any) to the zero at the center, one realises there is a steady or incremental decline.

Case in point, you keept mixing "gravitational pull" with claiming "no gravity". Very wildly different things that you can't seem to grasp. Also, quantum physics pretty makes your "no gravity in the center" idea impossible no matter how you word it.

Unless, of course, you can show that math.

This means that the layer above, like layers down a mine shaft have CRASED to contribute to the strength of the downward pull. how otherwise could the force have declined? It follows that if the inner layers of your choice could be removed, there would be no gravity force left.

Or, it means you don't understand math, gravity or arithmetic, as you've shown by using every excuse in the book to avoid showing the math you claimed you could to.

What gravity is, a property of mass, a tensioning of space, an exchange of graviton-radiation, the action of the Hicks Boson, does not matter here.

And you just proved, with that statement, you understand absolutely none of the things you claim. Well, that statement and dozens of others.

Unless you can, as you claimed, show the math.

These ideas are fine in an ideal scenario, like the Laws of motion of Kepler, working only for point-masses. You do not want to be OVER-MASS (you can not be overweight) floating inside that gravity-free cavity and pull the fragile ceiling down when coming too close.

Seriously? You're argument is that because star (or galaxial or galaxial superclusters, also) aren't spherical, that's your proof that gravity in a sphere cancels itself out? Using that very very very very very bad logic, you would float off the planet, the star wouldn't be shining and we wouldn't exist.

I say again to EVERYTHING you've said....show your math. I loathe and despise the spreading of bad, lazy thiking and pseudoscience and that is EXACTLY what you are selling. I have children that I have worked very hard to educate outside of the nonesense of the WT, I will be dead before I let charlatans spread idiot ideas in the name of science to dumb them or anyone else back down.

Show your math. Put up or shut up.

These ideas are fine in an ideal scenario, like the Laws of motion of Kepler, working only for point-masses. You do not want to be OVER-MASS (you can not be overweight) floating inside that gravity-free cavity and pull the fragile ceiling down when coming too close.

Weight is not the same as mass. At ALL. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Also, Kepler was a good starting point but ultimately wrong about several things, as we will all eventually be. You are wrong on several things now, easily proven.

Unless, of couse, you can show your math, which, strangely, you have argued against doing again and again.