The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: The Government on March 31, 2007, 08:18:39 AM

Title: Watch this
Post by: The Government on March 31, 2007, 08:18:39 AM
http://www.dailymotion.com/visited/search/BUGATTI/video/x157l2_bugatti-v

fast foward to about half way and youll see what im talking about


watch the whole thing if you like cars as i do.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Nicolae Carpathia on March 31, 2007, 08:39:41 AM
Damn his accept (though it sounds cool) I can't figure if he is saying can or can't see....

Do you understand him?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Nicolae Carpathia on March 31, 2007, 08:41:11 AM
Oh wait, now I see it. He says can't. right?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: The Government on March 31, 2007, 10:39:50 AM
Oh wait, now I see it. He says can't. right?

Yea you cant see it because its following the curvature of the earth

and for you lazy FE shits

hes at a test track in germany, and theres a perfectly flat, 5 1/2 mile straight  and you cant see the other end because it follows the curvature of the earth
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:33:07 AM
Or the road is not level.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: cmdshft on March 31, 2007, 01:39:18 PM
Anythings possible.

This thread is now about cars.

Although my ultimate dream car is a customized 2001 Chevrolet Camaro with a 500 HP Lingenfelter engine built in, I wouldn't mind having one of those Bugatti's. Although, Germany seems to be the only place in the world to really take advantage of 253MPH. And I doubt you can get that even on the Autobahn. I think the fastest anyones gone on that road was just over 200MPH and that was in a Porsche.

But my Camaro would smoke that too...
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 01:46:24 PM
Or the road is not level.

i think they're smart enough to make a level road.

if they can make a wicked car like that they can make a level road.

and if it wasnt level wouldnt it mean that it would have to start on the top of a hill?

i didnt see a hill
hey the government
did yo usee a hill?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: sokarul on March 31, 2007, 01:53:37 PM
Or the road is not level.
None level surface = death.  But the gradual curve do to the Earth doesn't equal death.  407 km/h is really fast.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on March 31, 2007, 01:59:56 PM
Or the road is not level.
None level surface = death.  But the gradual curve do to the Earth doesn't equal death.  407 km/h is really fast.

You'll never convince him it isn't flat unless you go do it yourself.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: The Government on March 31, 2007, 03:41:47 PM
If the road wasnt level, it would have been much easier to reach the top speed he did
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 04:42:11 PM
Not level = higher in the middle, among others.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: sokarul on March 31, 2007, 04:54:43 PM
Not level = higher in the middle, among others.
The asphalt would be the same thickness throughout the whole length.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 04:57:16 PM
And?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: sokarul on March 31, 2007, 05:02:11 PM
Exactly.  No man made hills in the middle.  It curves in the middle do to the curvature of the Earth.   
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 05:06:35 PM
Since when did man make the earth?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: sokarul on March 31, 2007, 05:10:34 PM
Since when did man make the earth?
When are you going to stop responding with questions?  Not to mention retarded ones.  Read again, I never said man made the earth, I said man can make hills.  Even 3 year olds know that. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 05:12:03 PM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: sokarul on March 31, 2007, 05:19:27 PM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 
Thats a possibility.  Its also a possibility that someone had a heart attack and fell in front the of the asphalt machine. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: rginer on March 31, 2007, 07:09:40 PM
I can't believe anyone is falling for this crap. Why do you think the narrator mentions "the curvature of the earth"? So that sheep like you will greedily buy into the round-earth lie. It is all part of the conspiracy folks. Besides, don't forget the track is in Germany, if you look carefully you can see that the landscape is hilly.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Nicolae Carpathia on March 31, 2007, 07:41:46 PM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 

The thing was made by professionals to test their prototypes, dude. He said it "they wouldn't want anyone see their prototypes". I don't think, that when you are making something new and better, you would be thinking "hey, let's make a small hill so that people in the future think that the Earth is round."

 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Darkfrog on March 31, 2007, 09:04:58 PM
OMG! What an awesome test drive. Such an unassuming car, would love to take run a speed-trap with that thing :D :D
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:15:46 PM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 

The thing was made by professionals to test their prototypes, dude. He said it "they wouldn't want anyone see their prototypes". I don't think, that when you are making something new and better, you would be thinking "hey, let's make a small hill so that people in the future think that the Earth is round."

 
I didn't say it was done to trick people about the shape of the earth.  Perhaps they just didn't have the funds to level over five miles of track.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 11:33:38 PM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 

The thing was made by professionals to test their prototypes, dude. He said it "they wouldn't want anyone see their prototypes". I don't think, that when you are making something new and better, you would be thinking "hey, let's make a small hill so that people in the future think that the Earth is round."

 
I didn't say it was done to trick people about the shape of the earth.  Perhaps they just didn't have the funds to level over five miles of track.

LOLOL /DISAGREE.

THE GOVERNMENT ACCORDING TO YOU HAS HELLA MONEY.
THEY CAN AFFORD ANYTHING

BUGATTI HAS HELLA MONEY.
ENOUGH TO MAKE A HELLA FAST CAR.

MONEY IS NOT AN ISSUE HERE!!

LOLOL /DISAGREE!!!
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:37:45 PM
Too bad they spent all their money on the car, and didn't put enough into making their track level.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 11:39:09 PM
Too bad they spent all their money on the car, and didn't put enough into making their track level.

it still doesnt make sence if the track isnt level
they would have been able to reach that speed MUCH faster.
according to your theory they would be going downhill the whole ride.
that would mean much faster speeds at much less time.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:40:10 PM
In my theory, they would be going uphill for most of the trip.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 11:41:51 PM
In my theory, they would be going uphill for most of the trip.

did you not watch the video?
YOU CANNOT SEE THE END OF THE TRACK
if it were going uphill for most of the ride then i think the track would not seem to dissapear.
nor would the trees surrounding it.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:44:56 PM
Why can't you see the end of the track?

BECAUSE IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HILL.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 11:47:03 PM
yes but you dont understand

your saying they are traveling upwards

on the incline of the hill
according to that we should see the track traveling up the hill

boy if your going to say all these things you have to think them through

look
if theres a 5 mile track
and the whole time its climbing UP a hill
if we stand at the begining of it
we should be able to see the end
for it is at a much greater height than we are.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:51:22 PM
What part of "THE END OF THE TRACK IS ON THE OTHER SIDE (THAT WOULD BE THE DOWNHILL SIDE) OF THE HILL" don't you understand?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on March 31, 2007, 11:53:24 PM
you're stll not understanding what im getting at
if the track is going up hill for MOST of the ride
how come in the movie it appears to be going downhill
i mean i know its following the curvature of the earth
but wahts the FE respoonse to it not appearing to go uphill.
even if we cannot seet he END OF THE TRACK
why can we only see a lilttle bit of it?
why doesit even APPEAR to be going up hill?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on March 31, 2007, 11:58:24 PM
I'm not talking about a mountain road here.  I really don't think you would notice a ten foot change in elevation over 3 or 4 miles.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on April 01, 2007, 12:06:18 AM
according to the RE theory if that were true they would basically be traveling in a flat line, not one following the globe.
and according to the FE theory it should technically be visible.
maybe after zooming in....
but i wasnt
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on April 01, 2007, 12:10:18 AM
Good lord. ::)
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on April 01, 2007, 12:19:32 AM
pwnt.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Nicolae Carpathia on April 01, 2007, 08:30:35 AM
What part of "THE END OF THE TRACK IS ON THE OTHER SIDE (THAT WOULD BE THE DOWNHILL SIDE) OF THE HILL" don't you understand?

What he means is that if there was a hill, and most of the track was going uphill, then that means we, instead of seeing a curvature on the end, would see a hill. We will see a BIG hill on the track. (remember, it is 5 miles of uphill track)

Also, if it was a hill, we would be able to see it by using the threes next to the track as a reference.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: TheEngineer on April 01, 2007, 08:40:33 AM
Yea, because 10 feet over 4 miles is really noticeable.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Nicolae Carpathia on April 01, 2007, 09:01:13 AM
Yea, because 10 feet over 4 miles is really noticeable.

Actually, if you are in phase with the foot of the hill, you can see it. Also, if there was a hill, and the car was going at such a speed, don't you think it would jump?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Miss M. on April 01, 2007, 09:07:07 AM
I can't believe anyone is falling for this crap. Why do you think the narrator mentions "the curvature of the earth"? So that sheep like you will greedily buy into the round-earth lie. It is all part of the conspiracy folks. Besides, don't forget the track is in Germany, if you look carefully you can see that the landscape is hilly.
Germany isn't a very hilly country. It has mountains, but when you're not anywhere near them, it's very very flat. The hills are hardly noticable. I drive from Holland to Essen every year. It's literally straight along the autobahn, really well and truely flat. And you can't see very far ahead. Try it sometime. :) Hilly my arse.

I'm sorry but that road was not on a hill. They would not be stupid enough to do that anyway - not on a test road! It's too dangerous surely, for top top speeds.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: frybaby on April 01, 2007, 11:22:01 AM
LOL!
ONCE AGAIN, PWNT!
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 01, 2007, 01:28:32 PM
Yea, because 10 feet over 4 miles is really noticeable.

Actually, if you are in phase with the foot of the hill, you can see it. Also, if there was a hill, and the car was going at such a speed, don't you think it would jump?

Wow, I don't think I could make out a 10 ft incline over 4 miles.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 01, 2007, 01:30:24 PM
What part of "THE END OF THE TRACK IS ON THE OTHER SIDE (THAT WOULD BE THE DOWNHILL SIDE) OF THE HILL" don't you understand?

What he means is that if there was a hill, and most of the track was going uphill, then that means we, instead of seeing a curvature on the end, would see a hill. We will see a BIG hill on the track. (remember, it is 5 miles of uphill track)

Also, if it was a hill, we would be able to see it by using the trees next to the track as a reference.

What is the difference between 'curvature of the surface' and a hill?  This whole discussion is too vague with phrases like "most of the track". 

you're stll not understanding what im getting at
if the track is going up hill for MOST of the ride
how come in the movie it appears to be going downhill
i mean i know its following the curvature of the earth
but wahts the FE respoonse to it not appearing to go uphill.
even if we cannot seet he END OF THE TRACK
why can we only see a lilttle bit of it?
why doesit even APPEAR to be going up hill?

So in the movie it appears to be going downhill, yet one cannot see the end.  What is it preventing someone from seeing the end of the track, then? 

What is the RE response for the track not appearing to go uphill?  If it were following the curvature of the round Earth the track would appear to go uphill. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 01, 2007, 01:33:49 PM
What part of "THE END OF THE TRACK IS ON THE OTHER SIDE (THAT WOULD BE THE DOWNHILL SIDE) OF THE HILL" don't you understand?

What he means is that if there was a hill, and most of the track was going uphill, then that means we, instead of seeing a curvature on the end, would see a hill. We will see a BIG hill on the track. (remember, it is 5 miles of uphill track)

Also, if it was a hill, we would be able to see it by using the trees next to the track as a reference.

What is the difference between 'curvature of the surface' and a hill?  This whole discussion is too vague with phrases like "most of the track". 

you're stll not understanding what im getting at
if the track is going up hill for MOST of the ride
how come in the movie it appears to be going downhill
i mean i know its following the curvature of the earth
but wahts the FE respoonse to it not appearing to go uphill.
even if we cannot seet he END OF THE TRACK
why can we only see a lilttle bit of it?
why doesit even APPEAR to be going up hill?

So in the movie it appears to be going downhill, yet one cannot see the end.  What is it preventing someone from seeing the end of the track, then? 

What is the RE response for the track not appearing to go uphill?  If it were following the curvature of the round Earth the track would appear to go uphill. 

Why would it go uphill?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 01, 2007, 01:36:49 PM
It would 'appear' to go uphill because of the spherical shape of the RE. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 01, 2007, 01:39:53 PM
No it wouldn't.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 01, 2007, 01:54:59 PM
Oh, now I understand why you are confused.  I'm saying the surface would appear to be steepest toward the observer as it stretched away to the line of horizon, where it would appear to level off and then go downhill. 

(http://mattm.zapto.org/images/surface.jpg)

That looks to me like the surface is rising up from where I am standing.  I thusly claim that it appears to go uphill. 

P.S.  I love MS paint.  It's been a while since I used it.  Good times. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 01, 2007, 04:44:42 PM
Oh, now I understand why you are confused.  I'm saying the surface would appear to be steepest toward the observer as it stretched away to the line of horizon, where it would appear to level off and then go downhill. 

(http://mattm.zapto.org/images/surface.jpg)

That looks to me like the surface is rising up from where I am standing.  I thusly claim that it appears to go uphill. 

P.S.  I love MS paint.  It's been a while since I used it.  Good times. 

Oh, I get what your saying now.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: GroundControl on April 01, 2007, 06:51:01 PM
Oh, now I understand why you are confused.  I'm saying the surface would appear to be steepest toward the observer as it stretched away to the line of horizon, where it would appear to level off and then go downhill. 

(http://mattm.zapto.org/images/surface.jpg)

That looks to me like the surface is rising up from where I am standing.  I thusly claim that it appears to go uphill. 

P.S.  I love MS paint.  It's been a while since I used it.  Good times. 

Actualy:
(http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/7448/diagram1rj3.gif)

On a round world, the 'flat' ground will appear to slope downwards. You have to remember that when you stand upright on 'flat' ground, you are perpendicular to RE's surface.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 01, 2007, 08:40:57 PM
You didn't use Paint, so your diagram is not so good.   :D

My other problem with your diagram is in knowing where the tangent line is in the actual situation.  Ideally, yes, we stand perpendicular to the surface, however, you are not going to be able to tell that the horizon is below this tangent line (which we can't see).  The declination is sufficiently negligible (like less than 1/100th of a degree).  So, there really is no difference between our two diagrams given such small angles. 

Basically, the video does not prove what the original poster thinks it proves.  He's making too many assumptions, one being that "they are smart enough to make a perfectly level road."  They may be smart, but the precision of road making equipment could not be good enough to come to a good conclusion as to the shape of the Earth. 

Another thing: knowing the speed of the car we can easily calculate the difference in forces on the car between the "perfectly flat RE" model and the "10-foot hill over 5 miles" FE model. 

The angle of incline of this hill is: arctan (10ft / 5mi) = 0.02 degrees. 
Now the difference between forces on the car (traveling at the same speed in each model) is REmodel = cos[above angle] *FEmodel
I can tell you without finishing the calculation that the difference is negligible because the COS of this degree measure is 1.0000000 (which is waaaay more significant figures than is necessary). 
So the forces on the car between the two models ARE identical. 


Because of this, one cannot come to a good conclusion.  There could be a hill.  The driver would not be able to tell the difference, though. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Chris Spaghetti on April 02, 2007, 03:29:54 AM
Do FEers live in a constant paranoid terror? you're implying that not only is the government conspiring to make the world flat but so are private engineering companies.

The company wants to make a road that's flat for testing their cars, if it was built on a slight hill the surveyors who first surveyed the site would have picked it out (which can be accurate to the millimetre) When the road was finished a second survey to check it's accuracy would be made, if it was not level the track would not have met the requirements of the build, the engineers would be tasked with either MAKING it straight or starting again. I know because I used to be a civil engineer and I was never briefed to "Make the world appear like a ball" by my boss .
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Miss M. on April 02, 2007, 03:40:00 AM
I know because I used to be a civil engineer and I was never briefed to "Make the world appear like a ball" by my boss .
yes you were! Why would you lie!?! Whyyyy!!!
Besides, surely your boss would tell you to tell people that he didn't brief you. Ha!!

Hang on. I'm an RE'er....RPGs really are addictive.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Bushido on April 02, 2007, 03:45:14 AM
You leave TheEngineer alone. He's just volunteering here for Christ's sake.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Miss M. on April 02, 2007, 03:46:59 AM
You leave TheEngineer alone. He's just volunteering here for Christ's sake.
Imagine if we all said that about soldiers on the battle field. "Hey, there's no need to shoot him, he's just volunteering!".
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Bushido on April 02, 2007, 03:51:55 AM
LAWL
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 02, 2007, 07:36:12 AM
You leave TheEngineer alone. He's just volunteering here for Christ's sake.

No one gets left alone here.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: DakaSha on April 02, 2007, 08:05:33 AM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 

why couldnt the earth be round dumbass
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 02, 2007, 08:15:27 AM
Why couldn't the road have be made cresting a small natural hill? 

why couldnt the earth be round dumbass

Because Tom Bishop said so.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Darkfrog on April 02, 2007, 08:56:32 AM
Do FEers live in a constant paranoid terror? you're implying that not only is the government conspiring to make the world flat but so are private engineering companies.

The company wants to make a road that's flat for testing their cars, if it was built on a slight hill the surveyors who first surveyed the site would have picked it out (which can be accurate to the millimetre) When the road was finished a second survey to check it's accuracy would be made, if it was not level the track would not have met the requirements of the build, the engineers would be tasked with either MAKING it straight or starting again. I know because I used to be a civil engineer and I was never briefed to "Make the world appear like a ball" by my boss .
Actually The Engineer is saying that engineers can't make level roads.  :P :P
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 02, 2007, 09:09:41 AM
Do FEers live in a constant paranoid terror? you're implying that not only is the government conspiring to make the world flat but so are private engineering companies.
If the road is "perfectly level" -- and if they believe the Earth to be round -- then they DID purposefully build the road with a mound in the center.  If the road is "perfectly flat" then it will be concave in the sense that it will not be level anywhere but the center. 

In thinking the Earth to be round, they had to make a hill in the center in order for the road to be perfectly level at every point.  So, in trying to make a road level at every point the engineers had to take into account the supposed curvature of the Earth, which in turn made a slight hill in the center of their road.  But, as I have shown in this thread, a road that is perfectly flat and a road that is slightly higher in the center will make no appreciable difference on the performance of the car. 

Out of curiosity: you used to be a civil engineer?  Where did your degree go? 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Darkfrog on April 02, 2007, 09:26:57 AM

In thinking the Earth to be round, they had to make a hill in the center in order for the road to be perfectly level at every point.  So, in trying to make a road level at every point the engineers had to take into account the supposed curvature of the Earth, which in turn made a slight hill in the center of their road.  But, as I have shown in this thread, a road that is perfectly flat and a road that is slightly higher in the center will make no appreciable difference on the performance of the car. 
You aren't making sense. Level means level with respect to the earth. If I take a plumb-bob and make a line perpendicular to the earth, it will be at a slight angle to an identical plumb-bob a few miles away on a spherical earth. However, on a FE, the 2 plumb-bobs will be exactly parallel.
A hill implies a rise above level. There is no 'hill' on a completely level road but the curvature of th earth would have the same appearance as if there were a hill.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: EvilToothpaste on April 02, 2007, 09:43:19 AM
You aren't making sense. Level means level with respect to the earth. If I take a plumb-bob and make a line perpendicular to the earth, it will be at a slight angle to an identical plumb-bob a few miles away on a spherical earth. However, on a FE, the 2 plumb-bobs will be exactly parallel.
A hill implies a rise above level. There is no 'hill' on a completely level road but the curvature of th earth would have the same appearance as if there were a hill.
Sorry if I don't make sense, but we are saying the exact same thing.  On a RE model there would only appear to be a hill, whereas on a FE there would actually be a hill (in this case of the road shown in the video), but the differences are entirely negligible to a great amount of precision. 
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Chris Spaghetti on April 03, 2007, 04:40:22 AM
Out of curiosity: you used to be a civil engineer?  Where did your degree go? 

I moved into Quantity Surveying, I wanted to move away from Civils and more into construction  :)
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 03, 2007, 05:32:57 AM
Out of curiosity: you used to be a civil engineer?  Where did your degree go? 

I moved into Quantity Surveying, I wanted to move away from Civils and more into construction  :)

Which pays more?
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Chris Spaghetti on April 03, 2007, 05:48:49 AM
At the moment QSing, but I wanted new challenges more than a healthier payslip
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Mr. Ireland on April 03, 2007, 08:55:41 AM
At the moment QSing, but I wanted new challenges more than a healthier payslip

Pfft, that's not the point of working.
Title: Re: Watch this
Post by: Human on April 03, 2007, 11:13:35 AM
Or the road is not level.

DAMN THAT ROAD!!!