"accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'

  • 30 Replies
  • 10439 Views
*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
If the earth is constantly accelerating, and if that is the reason for things falling down (earth catching up) then each consecutive time the apple falls down, it takes less time to hit the ground, since in your model it is the apple that remains stationary and the earth moves towards it faster each time.

For example: if the earth rises with the speed of 100mph for the first drop, and then accelerates to 200mph at the moment of the second drop, the stationary apple will be hit by the earth twice as fast.

This is not the cases, therefor this theory of an accelerating earth is proven false.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • +0/-0
  • Magic specialist
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2011, 06:31:47 AM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2011, 06:36:35 AM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.

And basic physics as well, while you're at it.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • +0/-0
  • 206,265
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2011, 06:37:14 AM »
Omega is doin it wrong.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2011, 06:43:52 AM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.

And basic physics as well, while you're at it.

Holy Crap! Yeah you are right! Forgot about that!

Gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration. The elevator thought experiment. Damn. That was rather stupid of me.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2011, 09:06:39 AM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.

I already told him about this. I don't think he listened.

Granted, it was a part of my UA FAQ.

They never believe me! :'(
« Last Edit: April 25, 2011, 09:08:54 AM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2011, 09:41:32 AM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.

I already told him about this. I don't think he listened.

Granted, it was a part of my UA FAQ.

They never believe me! :'(

Heh well, 'boy crying wolf' comes to mind ;-)

But yeah, I stepped in it this time :-)
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2011, 11:02:50 AM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2011, 11:11:09 AM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

Lol. Savour it.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

?

trig

  • 2240
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2011, 12:30:01 PM »
Read up on the equivalence principle.

And basic physics as well, while you're at it.

Holy Crap! Yeah you are right! Forgot about that!

Gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration. The elevator thought experiment. Damn. That was rather stupid of me.
You forgot a tiny word that makes a world of difference, and EnglshGentleman is trying to savor his hollow victory instead of explaining it to you.

       Gravity is locally indistinguishable from acceleration.

If you are inside an elevator without any contact to the outer world, gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration. But if you have a window and see the planets, those are not in your local frame of reference and you can distinguish a planet revolving around the Sun from a "planet" hovering above your head.

Also, the Coriollis effect is a clear demonstration of the effects of gravity in a non-local environment. The hurricane that passes over the USA is not in the local vicinity of one that forms close to Australia, and you can see that they are different.

If you want more examples, look at satellites. The Flat Earthers have been unable to explain how they orbit Earth so they declared them "a conspiracy", but in the real world they orbit because they do not stay in one local vicinity.

So, when you get a lesson of physics from a flat Earther, next time you should show a lot more distrust.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 43503
  • +20/-33
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #10 on: April 25, 2011, 12:36:26 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

Since when is an inconclusive thought experiment a victory?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • +0/-0
  • Now available in stereo
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2011, 12:51:43 PM »
Since when is an inconclusive thought experiment a victory?
12/10/1492
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2011, 12:58:57 PM »
You forgot a tiny word that makes a world of difference, and EnglshGentleman is trying to savor his hollow victory instead of explaining it to you.

       Gravity is locally indistinguishable from acceleration.

I do state that they would locally appear the same in the UA FAQ.

Quote
Q: "It is just too hard to think that an Earth accelerating upwards will simulate the same affects that we see gravity do every day."

A: When you look at Einstein's Equivalence Principle, you will find that it is not only quite possible, but true that they will locally appear to be the same.

Maybe it is because it is near the bottom, so people look past it. I shall revise my FAQ.



Physics

Q: "The Earth accelerating upwards is ridiculous. They wouldn't even appear the same. There are many tests we can do to observe this. What do you have to say?"


A: Equivalence Principle, bitch.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2011, 01:04:13 PM by EnglshGentleman »

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • +0/-0
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #13 on: April 25, 2011, 04:50:47 PM »
Science wins again! Invoke it when necessary, dismiss it when convenient; that's my Zeteticism's motto.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

*

gotham

  • 3624
  • +2/-1
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #14 on: April 25, 2011, 05:52:57 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • +0/-0
  • Magic specialist
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #15 on: April 25, 2011, 08:42:51 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #16 on: April 25, 2011, 08:44:29 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.

Informative posts have high-content.

*

Particle Person

  • 5967
  • +0/-0
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #17 on: April 25, 2011, 10:08:05 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.

Informative posts have high-content.

It is apparent to anybody viewing this thread that it is a major flat earth victory. Stating the very obvious should be considered low content posting.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #18 on: April 25, 2011, 10:50:51 PM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.

Informative posts have high-content.

It is apparent to anybody viewing this thread that it is a major flat earth victory. Stating the very obvious should be considered low content posting.

Wait, hold on: me making a mistake about something is a major victory? I mean, sure, I forgot a big scientific principal. But haven't you noticed I was just accepting that? How about you do the same about all the points I beat you on?
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

gotham

  • 3624
  • +2/-1
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2011, 05:12:55 AM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.

Informative posts have high-content.

It is apparent to anybody viewing this thread that it is a major flat earth victory. Stating the very obvious should be considered low content posting.

Wait, hold on: me making a mistake about something is a major victory? I mean, sure, I forgot a big scientific principal. But haven't you noticed I was just accepting that? How about you do the same about all the points I beat you on?

I thought the post above mine was attempting to claim a victory for RET science?  I could be mistaken, but if that is true then my response is required to set the record straight.  That would not equate with LCP.


?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2011, 08:37:42 AM »
There are few FE believers who believe the earth is accelerating upwards, that is just a strawman created to make us look stupid. Rowbotham did not believe that the earth is accelerating upwards. It is more likely that universal properties, such as vacuums and magnets are what causes these interactions.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • +0/-0
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: "accelerating earth" definitively disproven, please adjust your 'FAQ'
« Reply #21 on: April 26, 2011, 09:00:05 AM »
ANOTHER VICTORY FOR FLAT EARTH!!!

This was good to see. Well deserved.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!!

Agreed, it is nice to know that the rule against low-content posting is no longer being enforced.

Informative posts have high-content.

It is apparent to anybody viewing this thread that it is a major flat earth victory. Stating the very obvious should be considered low content posting.

Wait, hold on: me making a mistake about something is a major victory? I mean, sure, I forgot a big scientific principal.
Who is this master of a school of science and why did you forget him?
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

?

karl

  • 74
  • +0/-0
Read up on the equivalence principle.

you just made that up, or some loon did, how can you offer that as fact? and why don't you ever answer questions instead telling people to read this or read that, or posting a link to another lot of physically impossible science fiction?

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
  • +0/-0
Read up on the equivalence principle.

you just made that up, or some loon did, how can you offer that as fact? and why don't you ever answer questions instead telling people to read this or read that, or posting a link to another lot of physically impossible science fiction?

Are you just being provocative or are you referring to Einstein as a loon?

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • +0/-0
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
We cannot dismiss the possibility that he might simply be an idiot.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
  • +0/-0
Read up on the equivalence principle.

you just made that up, or some loon did, how can you offer that as fact? and why don't you ever answer questions instead telling people to read this or read that, or posting a link to another lot of physically impossible science fiction?

Karl, we need to stop doing this. I can't keep pointing you in the right direction. To debate efficiently and be given some respect, you need to know your science, and the only exceptions are those for the FEers. But us REers have an image to uphold!

If you haven't read about the equivalence principle then you haven't studied special relativity and thus probably don't know whether the OP is right or wrong with what he said.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

Hessy

  • 1185
  • +0/-0
  • My alts: Edgeworth, any/all spambots
Since when is an inconclusive thought experiment a victory?

?

karl

  • 74
  • +0/-0
Read up on the equivalence principle.

you just made that up, or some loon did, how can you offer that as fact? and why don't you ever answer questions instead telling people to read this or read that, or posting a link to another lot of physically impossible science fiction?

Karl, we need to stop doing this. I can't keep pointing you in the right direction. To debate efficiently and be given some respect, you need to know your science, and the only exceptions are those for the FEers. But us REers have an image to uphold!

If you haven't read about the equivalence principle then you haven't studied special relativity and thus probably don't know whether the OP is right or wrong with what he said.

don't be so patronising, where are you guiding me and pointing me in the right direction? I am testing the knowledge of those FE'ers who simply quote something that sounds sciencey instead of using the theory to expalin their point, which never happens on here, it's all "read this" "click this link", I want to know how the equivalence principle disproves the OP's valid and correct assertion

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
  • +0/-0
Read up on the equivalence principle.

you just made that up, or some loon did, how can you offer that as fact? and why don't you ever answer questions instead telling people to read this or read that, or posting a link to another lot of physically impossible science fiction?

Karl, we need to stop doing this. I can't keep pointing you in the right direction. To debate efficiently and be given some respect, you need to know your science, and the only exceptions are those for the FEers. But us REers have an image to uphold!

If you haven't read about the equivalence principle then you haven't studied special relativity and thus probably don't know whether the OP is right or wrong with what he said.

don't be so patronising, where are you guiding me and pointing me in the right direction? I am testing the knowledge of those FE'ers who simply quote something that sounds sciencey instead of using the theory to expalin their point, which never happens on here, it's all "read this" "click this link", I want to know how the equivalence principle disproves the OP's valid and correct assertion

We don't explain it because if people are going to come here and try to debate physics, than it should already be assumed that they know what the terms we are using mean.

Obviously it works just fine, because as soon as we reminded the OP of the Equivalence Principle, he went, "Oh ya, I remember now." and it was over with.

It is not our job to educated you on how physics work. Must we teach you how to add numbers together as well?
« Last Edit: May 04, 2011, 12:09:58 PM by EnglshGentleman »

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • +0/-0
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Must we teach you how to add numbers together as well?

It might not be a bad idea, actually. He probably thinks that 1+1 always equals 2, if you can imagine!
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.