The Bipolar model

This is allegedly FES's official model of the Earth.

To start for $5, explain the Attack on Pearl Harbor on this geography.

It's the later discovered Flat Earth model. On the TFES Wiki the Monopole model is often displayed for historical reasons and convenience, like how most people still use the classical Newtonian particle theory of light even though quantum mechanics shows that it actually behaves as a wave or possesses duality. Textbooks still present the old model. Despite the many QM experiments exhibiting wave nature of light, many people and authorities still use the classical point-to-point particle theory of light as the "main" model.

The Bi-Polar model is the model that the Universal Zetetic Society, which inherited Rowbotham's movement, came up with after they verified the Antarctic Midnight Sun in the 1920's; although they did not have a specific continental layout for it at the time.

This is how navigation works on the Bi-Polar model:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Bi-Polar_Model#Circumnavigation

The needle on a compass aligns with the magnetic field lines. Circumnavigation involves traveling Eastwards or Westwards in relation to those field lines, taking you around the nearest pole. On a Bi-Polar model the magnetic field lines would spread out from the North and South poles like the magnetic field lines on a bar magnet.



The needle of a compass would align with those magnetic field lines in the navigator's local area. Since East and West are at right angles to the field lines, moving East or West in relation to those field lines would take one in a circle around the North or South poles. This also implies that if one were to follow the magnetic field lines North or South that they would eventually get to the Northern or Southern poles.

It should be noted that the magnetic field lines which are produced by a magnet always wrap around and connect to the opposite pole, and that none travel unconnected forever into space.

This map shows more credibility although it makes the ice wall obsolete. Has the FES addressed this?

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:



The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether.


The Bi-Polar Flat Earth model was used in antiquity and was rediscovered by the Universal Zetetic Society.

This map shows more credibility although it makes the ice wall obsolete. Has the FES addressed this?

I disagree. I think it shows equal absurdity.

Have a look at the East coast of Australia on either of those "maps" for example. Now draw a straight line from any point along the East Coast of Australia on either map to the North pole. On both maps, the line is travelling in a West direction through Australia to the "North" pole. Try explaining the motion of the sun on these bi-polar "maps".

Directions are all wrong, and navigation and reality, relies on directions being correct, with magnetic North always pointing actually North, as it is on the globe earth.

The bi-polar model is in the trash just like Gleesons map flat earth is in the trash.

Quote from: Phases of Venus on December 15, 2024, 06:09:34 PM

This map shows more credibility although it makes the ice wall obsolete. Has the FES addressed this?

I disagree. I think it shows equal absurdity.

Have a look at the East coast of Australia on either of those "maps" for example. Now draw a straight line from any point along the East Coast of Australia on either map to the North pole. On both maps, the line is travelling in a West direction through Australia to the "North" pole. Try explaining the motion of the sun on these bi-polar "maps".

Directions are all wrong, and navigation and reality, relies on directions being correct, with magnetic North always pointing actually North, as it is on the globe earth.

The bi-polar model is in the trash just like Gleesons map flat earth is in the trash.

In the southern hemiplane, the south end of a compass will point directly toward the magnetic south pole.

Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

In the southern hemiplane,

Really?

So.  There are these simple but relatively accurate star atlases for the night sky.  They are based off month and time.  They are dial types that show the night sky for a certain time of year.

Northern hemisphere





Southern hemisphere



I would find it hard to believe that standard Star Atlas for the southern hemisphere would be accurate for a flat earth?


And it gets worse than that…


Care to draw out how people in Australia, Africa, and South America can look south and see the constellation Southern Cross?  Where the Southern Cross can be a navigational aid to find south? Find the southern celestial pole. 



And not this..

Quote from: WISHTOLAUGH on March 22, 2024, 01:18:43 PM

No one uses Sigma Octatntis to navigate to the supposed south pole.

I've ignored nothing, but I am going to start now by ignoring your stupid bullshit.

??

You keep trying to change the subject with basically lying how navigation in the southern hemisphere works with a sextant.  It’s not based off the celestial South Pole for the southern hemisphere where Polaris isn’t visible because of the earth’s curvature? 

How to find the celestial South Pole makes sense on a globe / sphere.






The celestial South Pole is meaningless on a flat earth

The reason a dial star atlas of the southern hemisphere is accurate is due to the fact the earth is demonstrably spherical which results in persons looks south from Africa, Australia, or South America where they all look to the same southern celestial pole.  And they see the one celestial constellation the Southern cross circling the southern celestial pole. 


And it even gets more worse for the flat earth model..

Debunking flat Earth using only a stick.

The below video by the same person shows the actual path the stick shadow traveled in France for a time around the equinox.

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 16, 2024, 12:59:54 AM

In the southern hemiplane,

Really?

So.  There are these simple but relatively accurate star atlases for the night sky.  They are based off month and time.  They are dial types that show the night sky for a certain time of year.

Northern hemisphere





Southern hemisphere



I would find it hard to believe that standard Star Atlas for the southern hemisphere would be accurate for a flat earth?


And it gets worse than that…


Care to draw out how people in Australia, Africa, and South America can look south and see the constellation Southern Cross?  Where the Southern Cross can be a navigational aid to find south? Find the southern celestial pole. 



And not this..

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on March 22, 2024, 01:43:38 PM

Quote from: WISHTOLAUGH on March 22, 2024, 01:18:43 PM

No one uses Sigma Octatntis to navigate to the supposed south pole.

I've ignored nothing, but I am going to start now by ignoring your stupid bullshit.

??

You keep trying to change the subject with basically lying how navigation in the southern hemisphere works with a sextant.  It’s not based off the celestial South Pole for the southern hemisphere where Polaris isn’t visible because of the earth’s curvature? 

How to find the celestial South Pole makes sense on a globe / sphere.






The celestial South Pole is meaningless on a flat earth

The reason a dial star atlas of the southern hemisphere is accurate is due to the fact the earth is demonstrably spherical which results in persons looks south from Africa, Australia, or South America where they all look to the same southern celestial pole.  And they see the one celestial constellation the Southern cross circling the southern celestial pole. 


And it even gets more worse for the flat earth model..

Quote

Debunking flat Earth using only a stick.

The below video by the same person shows the actual path the stick shadow traveled in France for a time around the equinox.

Quote

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

Has any member of FES ever boarded a flight from L.A. to Australia? Open question for $10.

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

Really.

How does looking south at actual stars work?

Care to draw out how people in Australia, Africa, and South America can look south and see the constellation Southern Cross?  Where the Southern Cross can be a navigational aid to find south? Find the southern celestial pole. 



And not this..

Quote from: WISHTOLAUGH on March 22, 2024, 01:18:43 PM

No one uses Sigma Octatntis to navigate to the supposed south pole.

I've ignored nothing, but I am going to start now by ignoring your stupid bullshit.

??

You keep trying to change the subject with basically lying how navigation in the southern hemisphere works with a sextant.  It’s not based off the celestial South Pole for the southern hemisphere where Polaris isn’t visible because of the earth’s curvature? 

How to find the celestial South Pole makes sense on a globe / sphere.






The celestial South Pole is meaningless on a flat earth

Hint.  Even in your bastardised map celestial South Pole and looking at the southern cross as a navigation aid to find south only works for a sphere


And it only gets worse for the actual sun and the shadows it casts.

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed. 

The Bi-Polar model is the model that the Universal Zetetic Society, which inherited Rowbotham's movement, came up with after they verified the Antarctic Midnight Sun in the 1920's; although they did not have a specific continental layout for it at the time.

Oh yes, well now, you who are so wise in the ways of science.

You made an expedition to Antarctica a century ago, so you suggest and I won't contradict. Is it too much to ask for you to make an expedition to Australia now this decade?

Quote from: AnneFrothingslosh on December 16, 2024, 02:07:09 AM

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

The midnight Sun at both poles is associated with the moons Eos, but this fact still needs to be further researched before it can be fully understood.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090404141630/https://www.science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm

And putting the cardinal points in the wrong position will not save the crazy ball Earth.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on December 15, 2024, 06:08:38 PM

The Bi-Polar model is the model that the Universal Zetetic Society, which inherited Rowbotham's movement, came up with after they verified the Antarctic Midnight Sun in the 1920's; although they did not have a specific continental layout for it at the time.

Oh yes, well now, you who are so wise in the ways of science.

You made an expedition to Antarctica a century ago, so you suggest and I won't contradict. Is it too much to ask for you to make an expedition to Australia now this decade?

There is no need for anyone to travel to Australia. Flights between Australia and the Americas have already been explained.

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:



The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether.


The Bi-Polar Flat Earth model was used in antiquity and was rediscovered by the Universal Zetetic Society.

There is no need for anyone to travel to Australia. Flights between Australia and the Americas have already been explained.

Have they been explained to your satisfaction?

It's the later discovered Flat Earth model. On the TFES Wiki the Monopole mode is model often displayed for historical reasons and convenience

i.e. you don't care about the truth and just provide whatever nonsense you have to get people sucked in?

like how most people still use the classical Newtonian particle theory of light even though quantum mechanics shows that it actually behaves as a wave or possesses duality. Textbooks still present the old model. Despite the many QM experiments exhibiting wave nature of light, many people and authorities still use the classical point-to-point particle theory of light as the "main" model.

No, nothing like that.
Prior to relativity and quantum mechanics, there were 2 schools of thought on light. Some saying light is composed of particles and others saying it is a wave.
The QM model is that it is a particle, and like all particles it is described by a wavefunction.
For some interactions, it acts as a wave, and that wave nature is important. For others it acts like a particle and that particle nature is important.
The important part here is that they are approximations which simplify the discussion and modelling which produce the same results (or near identical results) as the more complicated model.
As explained in the other thread, the monopole model vs bipolar model is nothing like that.

The needle of a compass would align with those magnetic field lines in the navigator's local area. Since East and West are at right angles to the field lines, moving East or West in relation to those field lines would take one in a circle around the North or South poles. This also implies that if one were to follow the magnetic field lines North or South that they would eventually get to the Northern or Southern poles.

Which does nothing to address the massive issue of distance.

It should be noted that the magnetic field lines which are produced by a magnet always wrap around and connect to the opposite pole, and that none travel unconnected forever into space.

No they don't. The vast majority do, but there is always one pair is disconnected unless you want to say the universe is spherical and it wraps around on itself.
That is the pair going from the north pole directly away from the south pole, and towards the south pole from directly away from the north pole.

But this also ignores just how far out those field lines can get.

e.g. someone going due south from the east coast of Russia would be pretty much going towards the edge of the FE disc.

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:

I would say a just as inaccurate version.
You still can't explain flights from Sydney to North America without adding on loads of nonsense which solely serves to try to save this model.

The aether

Or we can take the sane approach of discarded a completely unneeded aether and instead have Earth be round.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.

The issue isn't just circumnavigation, but also just simple point to point distances.

the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.

No, the globe was based upon reality, where measurements and simple calculations directly give the diameter without any need to appeal to a flat Earth fantasy.

The dense aether barrier

Also performs more unneeded magic.

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

No, they apply equally to all FE models.

And your attempts to save the bipolar also work equally for all FE models.

You need to have aether perform so many feats of magic that you could have it do so for any FE model, even the cat model, and just claim it works.
You have no evidence for all this magic, nor can you quantify it.

Meanwhile, the RE doesn't need any of that magic, and can give numerical predictions which match reality.

It's the later discovered Flat Earth model.

I'm sorry, but I happen to think this is memeworthy.



"Invented" doesn't mean the same as "discovered". A theory that is too fragile to survive a plane trip isn't a discovery. It's an invention.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on December 15, 2024, 06:08:38 PM

The Bi-Polar model is the model that the Universal Zetetic Society, which inherited Rowbotham's movement, came up with after they verified the Antarctic Midnight Sun in the 1920's; although they did not have a specific continental layout for it at the time.

Oh yes, well now, you who are so wise in the ways of science.

You made an expedition to Antarctica a century ago, so you suggest and I won't contradict. Is it too much to ask for you to make an expedition to Australia now this decade?

There is actually a Flat Earth expedition to Antarctica occurring as we speak.

I do admit that I am largely responsible for the Flat Earth Youtube community's mistaken belief that the Monopole model was the only Flat Earth model.

The media, the internet, Eric Dubey and the Youtubers got their initial information about Flat Earth from TFES, from a time before the Universal Zetetic Society materials became digitized online. Only Earth Not a Globe was available. When this website started in 2007 the goal for the first couple of years was to get and compile and understand as much as possible about the Flat Earth. The only historical information depicted it as Monopole. It wasn't until several years later, after FE Monopole was already popularized and spread on the web, did other material come online and we realized that the Victorian Flat Earth researchers moved on from Rowbotham and changed the model.

On the TFES wiki the Bi-Polar model is now taught alongside the Monopole model, depicted as the model which many Flat Earthers have moved on to. Even on this forum we find references that Lord Wilmore and Sandokhan have moved to the Bi-Polar model.

However, banishing the Monopole model would be a disservice to those who still argue for it, or use its visualizations, simplicity, or teach from it, so it stays. It stays for the same reason why Newtonian Physics stays as the main model. There is a large historical context and it exists as a stepping stone to the modern Relativity Physics which contradicts many of the Newtonian tenets.

Even when the results of the current Flat Earth expedition shows a repetition of our 1920's result that a midnight sun exists, the main Flat Earth model will still likely be Monopole. Only when the Bi-Polar model is utilized by the majority, will change occur.

After over 100 years Relativity still isn't utilized enough by the majority to become the default model that is taught. Other science theories have even taken over a thousand years to replace each other to become the main theory in their communities, so we can expect that this will take a while as well.

Howeever, banishing the Mofnopole odl would b a disservice to those wh still argue for it, or use itss visual!izations, simplicity, or teach from it, so it stays. It stays for the same reason why Newtonian Physics sttays as the main model.

Again, they 2 are incomparaable.
Newtonian physics stays as being taught and sude uscaeseb it is much smpler than the full relativistic treatment, and in the vasst majocrity of sitiuations gives a ?result result which is the sema wthin uncertainty.
That is not the case for your two to contradicory FE models.
The monopole model can't? even explain the sgouthern summer, or the south celestial celestial pole.
So it is quite faulty and there there is no reason to use it, and it is not an apprximation of the bipolar model.

Even when the results of the current Flat Earth expedition shows a repetition ,of our !1920's result that a midnight uns exists, the main Flat Earth model will still likel be Monoppole.

Because dep deep down, for the majority of, erEFs, the FE is about rejeciting, realit and clinging to a sfaynta. So it doesn't matter what the evidence shonws, thie!y will cling to a model hey like.
If they were going to to go based upon reality, they would discard a FE FE.

There is actually a Flat Earth expedition to Antarctica occurring as we speak.

Ok.  Still need to explain how the celestial South Pole and the constellation Southern Cross can be used to find south which has meaning throughout the southern hemisphere.  And how due south is the same relative direction. 

This is allegedly FES's official model of the Earth.

Soooo…

How does that work with the flat earth wiki explanation on seasons?

The Seasons
The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.

https://theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Seasons

I didn’t find 24 hour sun in the wiki

I did find the ice wall? 

The media, the internet, Eric Dubey and the Youtubers got their initial information about Flat Earth from TFES, from a time before the Universal Zetetic Society materials became digitized online.

Can you link to 24 sun and an explanation of the seasons in the wiki?  And then show how it addresses the seasons and the bipolar map? 

There is actually a Flat Earth expedition to Antarctica occurring as we speak.

I do admit that I am largely responsible for the Flat Earth Youtube community's mistaken belief that the Monopole model was the only Flat Earth model.

The media, the internet, Eric Dubey and the Youtubers got their initial information about Flat Earth from TFES, from a time before the Universal Zetetic Society materials became digitized online. Only Earth Not a Globe was available. When this website started in 2007 the goal for the first couple of years was to get and compile and understand as much as possible about the Flat Earth. The only historical information depicted it as Monopole. It wasn't until several years later, after FE Monopole was already popularized and spread on the web, did other material come online and we realized that the Victorian Flat Earth researchers moved on from Rowbotham and changed the model.

On the TFES wiki the Bi-Polar model is now taught alongside the Monopole model, depicted as the model which many Flat Earthers have moved on to. Even on this forum we find references that Lord Wilmore and Sandokhan have moved to the Bi-Polar model.

However, banishing the Monopole model would be a disservice to those who still argue for it, or use its visualizations, simplicity, or teach from it, so it stays. It stays for the same reason why Newtonian Physics stays as the main model. There is a large historical context and it exists as a stepping stone to the modern Relativity Physics which contradicts many of the Newtonian tenets.

Even when the results of the current Flat Earth expedition shows a repetition of our 1920's result that a midnight sun exists, the main Flat Earth model will still likely be Monopole. Only when the Bi-Polar model is utilized by the majority, will change occur.

After over 100 years Relativity still isn't utilized enough by the majority to become the default model that is taught. Other science theories have even taken over a thousand years to replace each other to become the main theory in their communities, so we can expect that this will take a while as well.

As pointed out by Jack, these two FE models are incompatible. The comparison to Newton-Einstein is invalid, because those latter two models are compatible. Only in extreme cases does Newtonian mechanics require Einsteinian correction.

What you are essentially describing above is politics, not the search for truth. You are happy to have untruth spoken on your behalf, because you feel it serves your interests. By that I mean that you believe the rim model is incorrect, but you refuse to contradict it. In the same spirit, you refuse to perform basic observations such as exploring the route to Australia, because you worry that the results would contradict your beliefs.

It is worth noting that Globe Earthers had no such qualms. They explored the world in sailing ships, risking life, limb and economic ruin, where a much lesser degree of accuracy was offered compared to what any private citizen has access to today. They did not make excuses for staying home, like, oh, the wind and the weather will make anything I find invalid.

It's pathetic.

Do better.

Newtonian Physics isn't nearly identical to Relativity Physics. They are incredibly different and contradictory. As mentioned in another thread, in Relativity gravity on earth is the upwards acceleration of the earth's surface through spacetime. That is vastly different to the view of gravity in Newtonian Physics.

Science has a long history of symbolizing and teaching things which have been overshadowed.  Take a look at the common symbol for science: The Atom



Visualized in media and textbooks, the atom is the universal symbol for science. The only problem is that Quantum Mechanics has shown that discrete particles don't exist. The discrete particle billiard-ball model of the atom is false. Matter actually exists as waves.

Not just light: Everything is a wave, including you, Marcelo Gleiser, Big Think -

“ In 1924, Louis de Broglie, a historian turned physicist, showed quite spectacularly that the electron’s step-like orbits in Bohr’s atomic model are easily understood if the electron is pictured as consisting of standing waves surrounding the nucleus. These are waves much like the ones we see when we shake a rope that is attached at the other end. In the case of the rope, the standing wave pattern appears due to the constructive and destructive interference between waves going and coming back along the rope. For the electron, the standing waves appear for the same reason, but now the electron wave closes on itself like an ouroboros, the mythic serpent that swallows its own tail. When we shake our rope more vigorously, the pattern of standing waves displays more peaks. An electron at higher orbits corresponds to a standing wave with more peaks.

With Einstein’s enthusiastic support, de Broglie boldly extended the notion of wave-particle duality from light to electrons and, by extension, to every moving material object. Not only light, but matter of any kind was associated with waves. ”

The Universe and Dr. Einstein, Lincoln Barnett -

“ For subsequent experiments showed that not only electrons but whole atoms and even molecules produce wave patterns when diffracted by a crystal surface, and that their wave lengths are exactly what de Broglie and Schrodinger forecast. And so all the basic units of matter—what J. Clerk Maxwell called “the imperishable foundation stones of the universe”—gradually shed their substance. The old-fashioned spherical electron was reduced to an undniating charge of electrical energy, the atom to a system of superimposed waves. One could only conclude that all matter is made of waves and we live in a world of waves. ”

Quantum Cryptography lecture at University of Alaska Fairbanks, Dr. Lawlor -

“ Many things, like photons or electrons, display several very odd mechanical properties with mystical sounding quantum names. The key point here is that everything is made of waves...

Superposition: an electron can be in several places at once, or several states at once. The terminology here is that the electron's wave function has spread over space. Needless to say, classical particles such as billiard balls cannot do this: the 8 ball is in the corner pocket, or not; but an electron can be around an atom AND not at the same time. ”

No Evidence for Particles, Casey Blood, Professor Emeritus of Physics at Rutgers University -

“ There are a number of experiments and observations that appear to argue for the existence of particles, including the photoelectric and Compton effects, exposure of only one film grain by a spread-out photon wave function, and particle-like trajectories in bubble chambers. It can be shown, however, that all the particle-like phenomena can be explained by using properties of the wave functions/state vectors alone. Thus there is no evidence for particles. Wave-particle duality arises because the wave functions alone have both wave-like and particle-like properties. ”

There are no particles, there are only fields, Art Hobson, American Journal of Physics 81, 211 (2013) -

“ Quantum foundations are still unsettled, with mixed effects on science and society. By now it should be possible to obtain consensus on at least one issue: Are the fundamental constituents fields or particles? As this paper shows, experiment and theory imply that unbounded fields, not bounded particles, are fundamental. This is especially clear for relativistic systems, implying that it's also true of nonrelativistic systems. Particles are epiphenomena arising from fields. Thus, the Schrödinger field is a space-filling physical field whose value at any spatial point is the probability amplitude for an interaction to occur at that point. The field for an electron is the electron; each electron extends over both slits in the two-slit experiment and spreads over the entire pattern; and quantum physics is about interactions of microscopic systems with the macroscopic world rather than just about measurements. It's important to clarify this issue because textbooks still teach a particles- and measurement-oriented interpretation that contributes to bewilderment among students and pseudoscience among the public. This article reviews classical and quantum fields, the two-slit experiment, rigorous theorems showing particles are inconsistent with relativistic quantum theory, and several phenomena showing particles are incompatible with quantum field theories. ”

Tom; you seem interested in making sure those that come here are aware of the various models so that something like this so-called "Final Experiment" doesn't happen again. Would you mind me sharing this thread to our rather large facebook group?

Eh sorry Tom. I guess you didn't want credit, so I found our own post. You know. From the actual Society. Love you are back. Little shade.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/Vm4mSJBoTCdG1tWN/

It always strikes me as inconsistent  when FE’s quote scientists of renown (Newton, Einstein, Schrodinger, Clerk Maxwell et-al) as if just by mentioning them it somehow validates this nonsense, we even have a world that apparently collapses like a quantum wave observation to try and smoke and mirror a reason for none of their maps making sense, completely forgetting the scale at which quantum physics works.

All these great minds, not one of them mentions the flat earth as a proposition.
You imagine yourselves in the “standing on the shoulders of giants” mold, but it seems more like minute parasites hanging on for dear life to their coattails. 

Newtonian Physics isn't nearly identical to Relativity Physics. They are incredibly different and contradictory. As mentioned in another thread, in Relativity gravity on earth is the upwards acceleration of the earth's surface through spacetime. That is vastly different to the view of gravity in Newtonian Physics.

No, there is no fundamental disagreement between the two theories on the nature of gravity, simply because Newtonian dynamics makes no judgement on what that nature is, it simply states that gravity exists and manifest as what we call a force and provides a formula for its strength and direction.

GR will NEVER replace Newtonian mechanics as you earlier suggested it would, because there is no reason to do so. Men were landed on the moon using Newton only, as is the case with all space travel, and will be the case for all space travel in the future, possibly with the exception of missions near black holes if that ever happens.

GR is used to calibrate GPS satellites, because the extreme accuracy required  for that system to work properly.