The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: sircool on January 14, 2016, 01:41:06 AM
-
This Q is for all the flatliners out there, physics on a globe already explained this phenomenon decades ago. So I know the answer if we accept earth is a rotating planet.
So what exactly is causing rotating storm systems to never pass the equatorial line around the planet? Oh wait, "equatorial" line around the "planet" cause I know your church is against such logic.
-
Celestial gears.
-
Aether, it's always Aether
-
It's because of the UA (Universal Acceleration).
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
Rotating Storms move away from this "equatorial line" because of the higher acceleration towards the "poles".
I used words like "equatorial line" and "poles", so you can better imagine what i'm explaining.
-
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
They would movs in rather straight lines. But they are curved. Why?
That doesn't explain the direction storms rotate either.
-
They would movs in rather straight lines. But they are curved. Why?
Correct! If you're only looking at the acceleration because of the UA they would travel in straight lines. Now look at their rotation, that is the reason why they're traveling in curved lines. It's the spinning which causes the curve they are traveling.
To understand it easier: - Start spinning a toy-spin-top
- Push it forward in any direction
- See how it travels a curve because of its spinning
-
It's because of the UA (Universal Acceleration).
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
Can I ask for clarification, here?
I understand the measurements referring to, but how can acceleration be different at different points of an object? Surely it would just tear itself apart?
-
It's because of the UA (Universal Acceleration).
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
Rotating Storms move away from this "equatorial line" because of the higher acceleration towards the "poles".
I used words like "equatorial line" and "poles", so you can better imagine what i'm explaining.
So if I left a drone flying, it would be pushed north by the UA?
-
It's because of the UA (Universal Acceleration).
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
Rotating Storms move away from this "equatorial line" because of the higher acceleration towards the "poles".
I used words like "equatorial line" and "poles", so you can better imagine what i'm explaining.
So if I left a drone flying, it would be pushed north by the UA?
Yes absoulte correct! But don't bring it in line with the perceived gravitational pull! Then you compensate the pull towards the "north pole".
It will move slowly towards the "north pole"
-
This Q is for all the flatliners out there, physics on a globe already explained this phenomenon decades ago. So I know the answer if we accept earth is a rotating planet.
So what exactly is causing rotating storm systems to never pass the equatorial line around the planet? Oh wait, "equatorial" line around the "planet" cause I know your church is against such logic.
There is no evidence that there isn't a huge invisible undetectable wall in the sky. Because there is no evidence it isn't there, some flat earthers accept it as fact. See also: Russell's Teapot.
-
It's because of the UA (Universal Acceleration).
Measurements showed that the UA is not evenly distributed. The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA.
Rotating Storms move away from this "equatorial line" because of the higher acceleration towards the "poles".
I used words like "equatorial line" and "poles", so you can better imagine what i'm explaining.
Oh, come off it!
- As many others will try to hammer home, how can it possibly be that "The more far you get away from an imagined "equatorial line", the lower is the power of the UA."?
If different parts of the earth are accelerating at different rates, these different parts must now be travelling at different velocities. The poles would have left us behind long ago! And whyever would the "centre" (North Pole) and the "outside" (Antarctica) be accelerating faster than intermediate regions (around the equator).
- This does NOT explain why Lows (including hurricanes and typhoons) rotate anti-clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere while Lows (including cyclones rotate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere
- Likewise it does NOT explain why Highs rotate clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere while Highs rotate anti-clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere - the opposite direction to Highs!
- Measured gravitational acceleration on earth also varies slightly in magnitude and direction due to the proximity of massive heavy ore bodies - this regularly used in prospecting for minerals. The is no way UA can explain this "anomaly".
Now, I know that Jack has said that do to relativity higher altitudes may experience a UA lower than at sea level. He has never, however, attempted to indicated that this reduction would correlate with measured lower gravity at higher altitudes.
You time might be better spent explaining the numerous anomalies in the Flat Earth model with its sun, moon, planets rotating above. There are simply too many discrepancies in this to go into here, look at:
- Directions of sunrise and sunset - at equinox on the equator is the simplest place to start, but it's wrong everywhere!
- The size of the sun and moon during the time from rising to setting.
- The clockwise rotation of stars in the Southern Hemisphere about a central point - South Celestial Pole.
- The gross discrepancies in the relative dimensions of the earth, esp Equator to North Pole compared to Equatorial circumference
and the list goes on and on!
-
Correct! If you're only looking at the acceleration because of the UA they would travel in straight lines. Now look at their rotation, that is the reason why they're traveling in curved lines. It's the spinning which causes the curve they are traveling.
To understand it easier: - Start spinning a toy-spin-top
- Push it forward in any direction
- See how it travels a curve because of its spinning
This won't work. They would curve in opposite directions if the "push" is ~uniform and ~similar. But they usually go west, then curve to east.
http://d32ogoqmya1dw8.cloudfront.net/images/eslabs/hurricanes/global_tropical_cyclone_tracks.v2.jpg (http://d32ogoqmya1dw8.cloudfront.net/images/eslabs/hurricanes/global_tropical_cyclone_tracks.v2.jpg)
Also, you still have to explain why they rotate in opposite direcions on different hemispheres.
I asked that question in seperate threath. But it was ignored:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65421.0#.Vpss04-G_F0 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=65421.0#.Vpss04-G_F0)