[apache]

Krakenup, I have given up on you. I really don't have a clue why we keep saying the same things differently and keep thinking the other one is wrong. The original argument I was making was that the surface of Jupiter is not at its outer atmosphere, and we honestly do not know what it's interior is composed of. Hence, declaring 'surface gravity' of a gas giant is pretty useless since we don't know if there is a surface or even where it is.
Now, as for DMM, if you have read some of my other Posts lately, you would know that I am not going to take a theory lying down.
First of all, there is the massively disputing theory of general relativity, which essentially throws Newtonian theories out the window. I'm not gonna argue anything about it, though, since I have a limited understanding, and its all theory anyways.
Second, anything regarding the gravitational forces at the center of a massive object is completely theoretical, and there is absolutely no experimental proof to support any of it. Therefore, taking it as a fact is something best done with a grain of salt, rather, an entire salt shaker.
Third, getting a net zero gravitational force is vectorial and mathematically correct, but the fact is that the gravitational forces could not cancel each other, putting no force on the body, they just act to keep the object at the center of the body in equilibrium, or in otherwords, they will not induce a velocity or accleration on the body as a whole in any direction.
However, if the object at the center could not withstand the forces pulling on it, it would indeed be ripped appart. Think of it like a reverse pressure. Rather than keeping an object from expanding, like air pressure acting on a balloon, it would keep an object from imploding.
Anyways, categorically saying I am wrong is wrong.