« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Down

Gravitational conundrums

  • 158 Replies
  • 19061 Views
*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Gravitational conundrums
« on: May 07, 2014, 01:17:43 PM »
I understand that in the flat earth model gravitation does not exist. However, it must be accounted for that it is a known fact that gravity varies at different locations on Earth. For example, one weighs approximately half a kilogram more at the poles than the equator.
Take, for example, this diagram by NASA (red = higher gravity, blue = lower gravity).

I don't understand how or why they would fabricate this.
Why does gravitation vary by location on Earth if it doesn't exist?

Also, consider reading this article. The point of it is that Chinese scientists discovered the speed of gravity moves between .93 and 1.05 times the speed of light.
Chinese Scientists Find Evidence for Speed of Gravity
Why does gravitation travel at the speed of light if it doesn't exist?

I'd like to ask any FE'er to answer my questions with any answer other than "it's a conspiracy".
Logged
i don't need a signature. go away.
?

Goth

  • 220
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2014, 04:20:34 PM »
Take, for example, this diagram by NASA   ;D
Logged
?

LukeB

  • 85
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2014, 04:54:51 PM »
I agree with V - why would anybody want to make up something like this; there's no obvious gain to them by doing so as it's not exactly useful information to the general public. I wonder if the red zones correlate to heavy metal deposits too, like gold. If the whole point of a round Earth cover story is to hide precious resources at the south pole then NASA giving out information like this goes right against what their "for".

Re: "Speed of Gravity", that's an interesting concept; especially if it's proven to go faster than light which would supposedly be possible if they got their range right.
Logged
?

Goth

  • 220
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2014, 05:12:53 PM »
Could it be, that NASA of yours is just another billion dollar scam corps,,, like your church
Logged
*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2014, 05:13:59 PM »
Quote from: Goth on May 07, 2014, 04:20:34 PM
Take, for example, this diagram by NASA   ;D
It's hard to tell around here, but I'll assume from that, that you think NASA is an impenetrably shadowy coven whose only purpose is to turn money into lies. Lies like that image above.

An international conference where the findings are shared and discussed by experts from anywhere and everywhere.
Plus, much of the data came from an ESA mission.
Logged
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.
?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2014, 05:25:48 PM »
Quote from: Goth on May 07, 2014, 05:12:53 PM
Could it be, that NASA of yours is just another billion dollar scam corps,,, like your church
Am I to understand you don't believe in research.
Logged
*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2014, 05:41:11 PM »
Quote from: Goth on May 07, 2014, 04:20:34 PM
Take, for example, this diagram by NASA   ;D
NASA is quite real, mister conspiracy theorist. Quite unlike your flat earth.
Logged
i don't need a signature. go away.
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2014, 09:21:18 PM »
Quote from: V on May 07, 2014, 01:17:43 PM
Also, consider reading this article. The point of it is that Chinese scientists discovered the speed of gravity moves between .93 and 1.05 times the speed of light.
Chinese Scientists Find Evidence for Speed of Gravity
Why does gravitation travel at the speed of light if it doesn't exist?

Acceleration also travels at ~C.  Perhaps they are simply mistaking acceleration for gravity, like all of the other scientists do? 
Logged
?

FETlolcakes

  • 233
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2014, 09:49:10 PM »
Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 09:21:18 PM
Acceleration also travels at ~C.  Perhaps they are simply mistaking acceleration for gravity, like all of the other scientists do?

If you believe in the speed of light, how then do you account for radio/laser bounces off the moon which always show that the (average) distance is ~384,400km?

There is no conspiracy here as you well know as it can be done by any amateur out there with the right equipment and know-how.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2014, 09:57:32 PM »
The speed of light is measured in a vacuum.  When you send a EM pulse to the moon, it is traveling through air and aether.  If we then calculate the distance using the speed of light in a vacuum, then yes, it will appear that the moon is farther than it really is. 
Logged
?

FETlolcakes

  • 233
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2014, 10:31:24 PM »
Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 09:57:32 PM
The speed of light is measured in a vacuum.  When you send a EM pulse to the moon, it is traveling through air and aether.  If we then calculate the distance using the speed of light in a vacuum, then yes, it will appear that the moon is farther than it really is.

You are presupposing that the aether exists with no evidence whatsoever.

Secondly, the difference of the speed of light in a vacuum and air (or our atmosphere) is infinitesimal.

Lastly, if we say that our atmosphere extends about 100km above the surface of the earth, you must be asserting that the aether slows light to almost a crawl to account for the results of EM/laser bounces as it is demonstrable that our atmosphere has little affect on the speed of light.

Sorry for this mini-derailment V, but I don't think I've seen a FE'r yet admit that the speed of light is actually correct, hence my question.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2014, 10:45:08 PM »
The speed of light is correct... in a vacuum.  You are the one making the assumptions.  You are simply assuming that the is no aether between the atmolayer  and the moon. 
Logged
?

FETlolcakes

  • 233
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2014, 11:02:24 PM »
Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 10:45:08 PM
The speed of light is correct... in a vacuum.  You are the one making the assumptions.  You are simply assuming that the is no aether between the atmolayer  and the moon.

What nonsense and thus how completely expected of a FE'r.

You are making the assertion for the existence of the aether, thus the burden of proof is on you to show that it exists. Declarative statements don't count as proof.

Also, I don't have to prove a negative.

Can you produce anything which actually shows that a) the aether exists and b) does what you assert it will do to the speed of light?

If not, we are left with the universally accepted distance to the moon being 384,400kms.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2014, 11:11:27 PM »
Are you saying that the speed of light while in a vacuum is the same as speed of light outside of a vacuum?

Quote from: FETlolcakes on May 07, 2014, 11:02:24 PM
If not, we are left with the universally accepted distance to the moon being 384,400kms.

Also, what is kms? 
Logged
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2014, 11:34:14 PM »
Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 11:11:27 PM
Are you saying that the speed of light while in a vacuum is the same as speed of light outside of a vacuum?

Quote from: FETlolcakes on May 07, 2014, 11:02:24 PM
If not, we are left with the universally accepted distance to the moon being 384,400kms.

Also, what is kms?
He means km.  You know that as you would recognize the number.

Refractive index defines speed of light.

I find it interesting that you ask questions that are easily found out.  It is as if you are trying to trip people up in a test rather than a genuine need to find an answer.  And you know you answer already.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2014, 12:04:24 AM by inquisitive »
Logged
?

FETlolcakes

  • 233
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2014, 11:39:39 PM »
Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 11:11:27 PM
Are you saying that the speed of light while in a vacuum is the same as speed of light outside of a vacuum?

No, and I don't seem how you've gotten this from what I've said.

To quote myself:

"...the difference of the speed of light in a vacuum and air (or our atmosphere) is infinitesimal"

This is demonstrably true. Do you deny this?

Now, all you are left with to save your FE is the aether doing some incredible things with the speed of light.

Quote from: jroa on May 07, 2014, 11:11:27 PM
Also, what is kms?

Perhaps kilometers doesn't need a plural? If so, apologies for the confusion.

Not that I think you're dodging the question, but I'll ask it again: Can you produce anything which actually shows that a) the aether exists and b) does what you assert it will do to the speed of light?
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2014, 12:03:21 AM »
Albert Einstein apparently did not have a problem with aether.  In fact, in 1920, at his inaugural lecture in Leyden titled “The Ether and the Relativity Theory,” Einstein said, "the ether concept has once more acquired a clear content. The ether in the general theory of relativity is a medium which itself is bereft of all mechanical and kinetic properties, but which has a share in determining mechanical and electromechanical occurrences."

Are you now saying that Einstein did not know what he was talking about?
Logged
*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2014, 12:08:34 AM »
Variations in what you precieve to be "gravity" proves the existence of aether.
Logged
Read the FAQS.
?

FETlolcakes

  • 233
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2014, 12:22:07 AM »
Quote from: jroa on May 08, 2014, 12:03:21 AM
Albert Einstein apparently did not have a problem with aether.  In fact, in 1920, at his inaugural lecture in Leyden titled “The Ether and the Relativity Theory,” Einstein said, "the ether concept has once more acquired a clear content. The ether in the general theory of relativity is a medium which itself is bereft of all mechanical and kinetic properties, but which has a share in determining mechanical and electromechanical occurrences."

Are you now saying that Einstein did not know what he was talking about?

*Yawn*. Arguments from authority don't impress me.

I asked you to actually prove what you assert, not throw names at me. Just as if I were to assert that the moon has migrating shrimp on its surface of which x and y believe it, you would ask me for my proof and not merely take x and y's word for it, regardless of who they were.

I also find it ironic that FE's bandy about Einstein's name like he would have actually agreed with anything any of you had to say. On the one hand, Einstein is right about the aether of which there is zero evidence for, but completely wrong about gravitation of which the evidence is overwhelming?

Your aether may as well be god/fairies/angels for all the evidence there is for it.
Logged
*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2014, 12:23:59 AM »
Quote from: Vauxhall on May 08, 2014, 12:08:34 AM
Variations in what you precieve to be "gravity" proves the existence of aether.
Logged
Read the FAQS.
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2014, 12:31:26 AM »
Quote from: Vauxhall on May 08, 2014, 12:08:34 AM
Variations in what you precieve to be "gravity" proves the existence of aether.
Please explain.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2014, 12:49:55 AM »
Nikola Tesla conducted many experiments that all prove the existence of aether.  Maybe you should study up on him.  Or, was he lying, like you claim of Einstein? 
Logged
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2014, 01:09:04 AM »
Quote from: jroa on May 08, 2014, 12:49:55 AM
Nikola Tesla conducted many experiments that all prove the existence of aether.  Maybe you should study up on him.  Or, was he lying, like you claim of Einstein?
You do like the lying word.  What are current statements on aether?
Logged
?

JiffyJuff

  • 88
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2014, 02:52:10 AM »
Quote from: Vauxhall on May 08, 2014, 12:08:34 AM
Variations in what you precieve to be "gravity" proves the existence of aether.
I can help you with the mathematical proof.

Because gravity varies,
Therefore aether exists. (magical stuff happens)
Logged
Quote from: sceptimatic on April 07, 2013, 08:24:19 PM
The thing that makes things fall is the weight of the object falling.
Wow.
?

11cookeaw1

Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2014, 03:05:00 AM »
The "Aether" would have to be ridiculously potent as it would have to slow light down to barely 1% of it's normal velocity. This would cause some SERIOUS refraction It would also have to not exist at sea level, as even a change of a few parts per billion of the amount of Aether in an area would have detectable effects on the speed of light.
Logged
*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Explain me this
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2014, 03:28:24 AM »
What is this Aether made of?
Logged
i don't need a signature. go away.
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2014, 04:01:11 AM »
I don't think anyone knows for sure what aether is made out of.  Some speculate that it is a force or field.  Some think it could be a physical material substance.  And, still others believe it is physical, yet non-material.

Here is another quote from Einstein.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#General_relativity
According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable;
Logged
?

11cookeaw1

Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2014, 04:09:40 AM »
Quote from: jroa on May 08, 2014, 04:01:11 AM
I don't think anyone knows for sure what aether is made out of.  Some speculate that it is a force or field.  Some think it could be a physical material substance.  And, still others believe it is physical, yet non-material.

Here is another quote from Einstein.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#General_relativity
According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable;
Random out of context quotes are not evidence of anything.
Logged
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2014, 04:22:26 AM »
Quote from: 11cookeaw1 on May 08, 2014, 04:09:40 AM
Quote from: jroa on May 08, 2014, 04:01:11 AM
I don't think anyone knows for sure what aether is made out of.  Some speculate that it is a force or field.  Some think it could be a physical material substance.  And, still others believe it is physical, yet non-material.

Here is another quote from Einstein.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#General_relativity
According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable;
Random out of context quotes are not evidence of anything.

Oh, well here is the entire quote for you so you don't somehow take it out of context.

Quote from: Albert Einstein
We may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an aether. According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this aether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.[4]
Logged
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
Re: Gravitational conundrums
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2014, 04:30:16 AM »
'Since the development of special relativity, theories using a substantial aether are not used any more in modern physics, and are replaced by more abstract models'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#General_relativity
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Up
« previous next »