The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: FET is unrealistic on October 01, 2009, 09:42:03 AM
-
How thin is this so called "flat earth"?
Is the Sun round or flat?
Are all the other planets round or flat?
need info to prove you wrong?
-
I have! i need information wait sorry i mean "guesstimation" on the "flatearth's"
>Size
>Shape
>Thickness
>if it spins
>and anything else possilble
-
Try the FAQ.
-
How thin is this so called "flat earth"?
Unknown.
Is the Sun round or flat?
Some FEers say round, some say flat.
Are all the other planets round or flat?
Some FEers say round, some say flat.
>Size
>Shape
>Thickness
>if it spins
>and anything else possilble
>FAQ, >FAQ, >see above, >most people think not, >sorry, I'm not psychic.
-
I have! i need information wait sorry i mean "guesstimation" on the "flatearth's"
>Size
>Shape
>Thickness
>if it spins
>and anything else possilble
Infinite slab of finite thickness that does not spin.
-
How thin is this so called "flat earth"?
Unknown.
Is the Sun round or flat?
Some FEers say round, some say flat.
Are all the other planets round or flat?
Some FEers say round, some say flat.
>Size
>Shape
>Thickness
>if it spins
>and anything else possilble
>FAQ, >FAQ, >see above, >most people think not, >sorry, I'm not psychic.
To all RE'ers, people who believe in a flat Earth simply don't believe anything that RE'ers believe in, and turn to ridiculous alternatives. It's as simple as that. They disagree for the sake of disagreement.
-
To all RE'ers...
I'm sorry, when were you elected President of the Round Earth?
-
To all RE'ers...
I'm sorry, when were you elected President of the Round Earth?
Good one!
-
to make it simpler for the f.e.t to understand.. A sphere is the simplest energy-efficient geometric shape to contain a given quantity of matter thus the earth must be round.
That's why soap bubbles take the same shape. i done see many bubbles that are flat
even if the earth was 'flat' over time gravity and the spinning motion in space and the orbit around the sun would make it round.... ::)
-
to make it simpler for the f.e.t to understand.. A sphere is the simplest energy-efficient geometric shape to contain a given quantity of matter thus the earth must be round.
That's why soap bubbles take the same shape. i done see many bubbles that are flat
even if the earth was 'flat' over time gravity and the spinning motion in space and the orbit around the sun would make it round.... ::)
Nah, dude. They, for some reason, think that gravity doesn't exist, and we aren't orbiting around the Sun.
I don't understand why, but that's what they think.
-
to make it simpler for the f.e.t to understand.. A sphere is the simplest energy-efficient geometric shape to contain a given quantity of matter thus the earth must be round.
That's why soap bubbles take the same shape. i done see many bubbles that are flat
even if the earth was 'flat' over time gravity and the spinning motion in space and the orbit around the sun would make it round.... ::)
Nah, dude. They, for some reason, think that gravity doesn't exist, and we aren't orbiting around the Sun.
I don't understand why, but that's what they think.
i always thought that to..... but its the only thing that makes reasonable sense..
-
i always thought that to..... but its the only thing that makes reasonable sense..
Why?
-
That's why soap bubbles take the same shape. i done see many bubbles that are flat
What happens if you apply a large force to a bubble with only weak surface tension then?
-
That's why soap bubbles take the same shape. i done see many bubbles that are flat
What happens if you apply a large force to a bubble with only weak surface tension then?
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
-
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
And, if it were in a vacuum in the absence of a gravitational field, what would happen to the substance that was once arranged into a bubble?
-
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
And, if it were in a vacuum in the absence of a gravitational field, what would happen to the substance that was once arranged into a bubble?
Ah...now I see your logic. But this would imply that FE'rs also deny that a ball is round? The reason being they can only see one side at a time; the outside?
-
Ah...now I see your logic. But this would imply that FE'rs also deny that a ball is round? The reason being they can only see one side at a time; the outside?
How is that in any way similar to the "force on a bubble" scenario?
-
It's only the most efficient shape if gravitation due to curved spacetime due to mass exists.
-
Ah...now I see your logic. But this would imply that FE'rs also deny that a ball is round? The reason being they can only see one side at a time; the outside?
How is that in any way similar to the "force on a bubble" scenario?
Because if you were to state that a burst bubble in an vacuum with no gravity achieves a flat form, the outside would at one point cease to exist, leavin "nothing" in it's place.
-
Because if you were to state that a burst bubble in an vacuum with no gravity achieves a flat form, the outside would at one point cease to exist, leavin "nothing" in it's place.
???
-
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
I said low surface tension to make it clear that the shape will flatten out rather than be held in a ball shape by that force alone. The Earth is not hollow (thankfully) so it doesn't burst under the influence of the DE/UA.
-
Because if you were to state that a burst bubble in an vacuum with no gravity achieves a flat form, the outside would at one point cease to exist, leavin "nothing" in it's place.
???
If you were to flatten a bubble to the extent that it flattens (not in layers) and this bubble was originally round, it would have to burst at one point, letting the edge go and stretch to form the outer rim. Same principle applies to a ball, if one imagines the ball to be round by origin.
-
If you were to flatten a bubble to the extent that it flattens (not in layers) and this bubble was originally round, it would have to burst at one point, letting the edge go and stretch to form the outer rim. Same principle applies to a ball, if one imagines the ball to be round by origin.
The most I can gather from what you're saying is "if you apply a force to a ball, it will flatten too." Yes, this is true, but it would need to be a much larger force than what is required for a bubble.
-
If you were to flatten a bubble to the extent that it flattens (not in layers) and this bubble was originally round, it would have to burst at one point, letting the edge go and stretch to form the outer rim. Same principle applies to a ball, if one imagines the ball to be round by origin.
The most I can gather from what you're saying is "if you apply a force to a ball, it will flatten too." Yes, this is true, but it would need to be a much larger force than what is required for a bubble.
True, but still the Q remains; when flattening any object to the point that it is flattened completely and not in two layers (over- and under-side) the void of what was the underside must leave a "nothing". And a nothing can not exist.
-
True, but still the Q remains; when flattening any object to the point that it is flattened completely and not in two layers (over- and under-side) the void of what was the underside must leave a "nothing". And a nothing can not exist.
Okay, you've lost me again. What do you mean by "not in two layers"?
-
True, but still the Q remains; when flattening any object to the point that it is flattened completely and not in two layers (over- and under-side) the void of what was the underside must leave a "nothing". And a nothing can not exist.
Okay, you've lost me again. What do you mean by "not in two layers"?
Well, imagine you take a soft, hollow ball. Squeeze this so that it is seemingly flat. You will still have an over- and under-side (the side you could clearly see with you eyes, and the rear-side that you would have to imagine being there).
If I then backtrack to your Q about the bubble, in absolute vacuum with no gravity, what remains of the former ball-shaped bubble?
A flat object right?
So, when this is applied to the FE'rs belief that Arctic is in center of the earth and Antarctica is the outer rim, then the under-side of the earth must be a massive void...that again can not exist.
Or does the earth carry two different worlds at the same time, one over- and one under-world?
And if this is the presumption, what then of the athmosphere in the under-world being that the earth is travelling through space in an upward motion?
-
Well, imagine you take a soft, hollow ball. Squeeze this so that it is seemingly flat. You will still have an over- and under-side (the side you could clearly see with you eyes, and the rear-side that you would have to imagine being there).
If I then backtrack to your Q about the bubble, in absolute vacuum with no gravity, what remains of the former ball-shaped bubble?
A flat object right?
So, when this is applied to the FE'rs belief that Arctic is in center of the earth and Antarctica is the outer rim, then the under-side of the earth must be a massive void...that again can not exist.
Or does the earth carry two different worlds at the same time, one over- and one under-world?
And if this is the presumption, what then of the athmosphere in the under-world being that the earth is travelling through space in an upward motion?
You cannot have a one-sided disc. Of course the Earth has another side, but the other side probably has no air. In fact, it is probably being constantly bombarded by whatever force is accelerating the Earth upwards.
-
He's having problems grasping turning a globe into FE.
Which everyone has problems with too, since there's not a map yet.
-
He's having problems grasping turning a globe into FE.
Which everyone has problems with too, since there's not a map yet.
Hope you didn't mean that I have aproblem grasping...'cause that would be false, however you're correct about the absence of a map.
I do wonder why? :P
-
No, you don't understand how you'd take RE and poke a hole in the bottom (south pole) and stretch it out flat to work.
Because, well, you can't do that.
-
No, you don't understand how you'd take RE and poke a hole in the bottom (south pole) and stretch it out flat to work.
Because, well, you can't do that.
Of course I DO understand that! If one carries some ounce of imaginative 3D-perspective, one will easily imagine how this is to be done and what it would look like, however the distance between the landmasses in the RET southern hemisphere will be completely out of whack compared to the distances we easily can measure both in length and in time with RET.
So for later debates, please don't tell me what I can and can not imagine. You don't know me all that well yet. ;D
-
Part of doing would mean keeping them in shape and the right distances.
Tell me when you understand how to that, because that's what I'm talking about.
-
Part of doing would mean keeping them in shape and the right distances.
Tell me when you understand how to that, because that's what I'm talking about.
K, I think you misunderstood...either me or yourself. We were talking 'bout IMAGINING, not making.
-
Ditto
-
Ok unbanneded yay. anyway if the world is infinitely thick then it would be infinite in weight so...
and why is the earth being propelled upwards? why not around a sun. that is round.
and if the earth was flat there would be no magnetic field, radiation would bombard us and we would die, unless u have an alternate way of producing a magnetic field, becuse mother nature has been doing it since the dawn of time, yet we humans who have been around for maybe 15,000 years have been able to make a magnetic shield around the earth and it is a conspiracy that it isnt there that we are flat, infinitely think but limited in weight, makes no sense whatsoever.
Does the iron-nickle based core exist to you Fe'ers or is there no thermal center for or earth Flat or not
-
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
And, if it were in a vacuum in the absence of a gravitational field, what would happen to the substance that was once arranged into a bubble?
And, if you put the bubble in a counter clockwise spinning vortex with an angry cat what will happen to the man who blew the bubble?
-
Well, the bubble would burst right? Not get flattened.
And, if it were in a vacuum in the absence of a gravitational field, what would happen to the substance that was once arranged into a bubble?
And, if you put the bubble in a counter clockwise spinning vortex with an angry cat what will happen to the man who blew the bubble?
Warning low content.