The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: fshy94 on December 27, 2007, 10:55:18 PM

Title: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on December 27, 2007, 10:55:18 PM
Now, heres one I want to hear answered. How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved? And remember, the Coriolis effect affects hurricanes and so on, so it certainly exists. Well?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: divito the truthist on December 28, 2007, 04:11:22 AM
How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved?

"The Coriolis effect is not a result of the curvature of the Earth, only of its rotation."
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on December 28, 2007, 08:29:17 AM
ah yes, but then how do you explain the fact that on different hemispheres, the coriolis effect points in opposite directions? Storms in the northern hemisphere veer west, and vice versa on the southern hemisphere, all under an RE definition. How can this be on a flat earth?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: divito the truthist on December 29, 2007, 05:18:54 AM
Either something causes it above or below the Earth, or the Earth is a parabolic shape.

"To demonstrate the Coriolis effect, a parabolic turntable can be used. On a flat turntable, the inertia of a co-rotating object would force it off the edge. But if the surface of the turntable has the correct parabolic bowl shape and is rotated at the correct rate, then the component of gravity tangential to the bowl surface will exactly equal the centripetal force necessary to keep the water rotating at its velocity and radius of curvature. This allows the Coriolis force to be displayed in isolation. When a container of fluid is rotating on a turntable, the surface of the fluid naturally assumes the correct parabolic shape. This fact may be exploited to make a parabolic turntable by using a fluid that sets after several hours, such as a synthetic resin.

Discs cut from cylinders of dry ice can be used as pucks, moving around almost frictionlessly over the surface of the parabolic turntable, allowing effects of Coriolis on dynamic phenomena to show themselves. To get a view of the motions as seen from the reference frame rotating with the turntable, a video camera is attached to the turntable so as to co-rotate with the turntable. Because this reference frame rotates several times a minute, rather than only once a day like the Earth, the Coriolis acceleration produced is many times larger, and so easier to observe on small time and spatial scales, than is the Coriolis acceleration caused by the rotation of the Earth.

In a manner of speaking, the Earth is analogous such a turntable. The rotation has caused the planet to settle on a spheroid shape such that the normal force, the gravitational force, and the centrifugal force exactly balance each other on a "horizontal" surface. (See equatorial bulge.)"
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: kai on December 29, 2007, 01:36:22 PM
Either something causes it above or below the Earth, or the Earth is a parabolic shape.

So is earth a flat or a curved bowl (as your excerpt suggests)?  If it's a curved earth then yes it solves this particular problem, but if the earth is bowl shaped, then one should be able to see from Australia to South America by looking across the north pole.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: skeptical scientist on December 29, 2007, 02:56:00 PM
How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved?

"The Coriolis effect is not a result of the curvature of the Earth, only of its rotation."
Yes and no. The magnitude of the force depends on the radial velocity, which is very different from the velocity along the surface of the earth due to the curvature. To observe the difference between the effects of Coriolis force on a flat and a curved Earth it is only necessary to check the magnitude of the Coriolis effect at different latitudes, say by means of a Foucault's pendulum.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Lorcan on December 30, 2007, 06:54:10 PM
How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved?

"The Coriolis effect is not a result of the curvature of the Earth, only of its rotation."


Incorrect. Well, you're correct if you mean that the Coriolis force itself is not a result of a curved Earth. But the Coriolis effect we observe on our planet is very much in line with what would be only possible on a curved Earth, not a flat Earth.

I'd suggest reading up on the Coriolis force and how it is exhibited in many natural phenomena. Also feel free to seek out a couple of my other posts on this subject. They are brief, but informative. 
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: divito the truthist on December 30, 2007, 06:58:12 PM
I'd suggest reading up on the Coriolis force and how it is exhibited in many natural phenomena. Also feel free to seek out a couple of my other posts on this subject. They are brief, but informative. 

I've already read about it long ago. Not really much that's special.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Lorcan on December 30, 2007, 07:14:53 PM
I'd suggest reading up on the Coriolis force and how it is exhibited in many natural phenomena. Also feel free to seek out a couple of my other posts on this subject. They are brief, but informative. 

I've already read about it long ago. Not really much that's special.

Ok. Then I don't understand how winds traveling in different directions in different hemispheres is not an issue of a spherical or curved Earth. I suppose this is somehow explained in the flat Earth theory? And inertial circles surely must have their place in this flat earth interpretation of the Coriolis effect. If you can't suggest an explanation then I can suggest that you go back and re-read whatever it was that you read.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Dioptimus Drime on December 30, 2007, 08:01:37 PM
Don't you mean the Coriolis myth?


~D-Draw
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 04, 2008, 06:46:56 PM
Bump. No explanations?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Rod Stewart on January 04, 2008, 06:54:00 PM
Would two counter-moons spining in opposite directions below the earth do that?

Clockwise in the "north" half, and cc in the "south" half.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 04, 2008, 06:55:55 PM
Negative. According to FE the puny moons have enough force to affect us, while the sun does not. Not to mention the fact that the sun does not crash into the Earth, so you can't increase gravitational constant G. I calculate that according to FE, the FE sun ought to give a gravitational force of less than 0.025 Newtons, which does not correlate well to any attempt to use the moon, which will provide even less force. Let me give you an example of using 0.025 Newtons on a plane. That means that the planes acceleration is 0.00000025 m/s^2. Which means that the plane moves 1 additional meter every 400 days. Over an year. Best chance. Coriolis effect is stronger than that...besides, doesn't FE have enough moons already to explain the tides? Oh, and if the moons were close enough to make the Coriolis effect, they'd crash into the Earth. Plus they'd interact with the tides in an easily observable manner...

EDIT:Just thought of point number 2 -- According to a FE, the earth spins about the North Pole, correct? Therefore, since the lateral velocity of the Earth due to spin would be zero at the pole, the Coriolis effect, according to FE, would be strongest at Antarctica, and disappear at the North Pole, and the equator would be the midzone. This is not observed, and can easily be proved with the curvature of a plane flight, or a quick look at the trajectory of a hurricane. Well? I think that this is one of the stronger points against FE.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 04, 2008, 08:31:37 PM
The Flat Earth does not spin. The Coriolis Effect can be explained as follows:

The two turnings of the winds between hemispheres create atmospheric "gears" with the teeth of these gears laying along the equator. The turning of the "gears" keep each other generally moving in opposite directions. Not literal gears, but ones consisting of wind currents rotating around a common center. When two wind currents moving in opposite directions collide at the equator it creates a reaction in accordance with Newtons third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The molecules of the air are shot outwards and away with a direction and magnitude directly opposite.

What sits over the equator to make this such a special area? The sun - which constantly imparts temperatures to the two hemispheres, rising pressure directly under its umbrella with its heat, gradually moving the winds within its circling spotlight outwards and away from the high pressures of the day out towards the low pressures of the night. It is analogous to a spoon churning a thick atmosphere in a vast mixing bowl. The spoon sifts through the atmosphere, imparting the molecules to its left in one direction, and imparting the molecules to its right in another. This effect builds up over time, creating predictable and recurring patterns of wind currents.

Here's an Illustration:

(http://www.dancad3d.com/D3022020.GIF)

Where the teeth connect over the equator represents the area where the sun is sucking in and spitting out wind as it raises temperature and pressure beneath its vicinity. Over the course of countless years the wind currents have become stable and predictable, colliding at the equator and keeping neighboring wind systems moving in opposite directions through gearing.

But this effect is still not yet universal. There are still wind currents which occasionally wander into opposing hemispheres, violating the principles of the Coriolis Effect.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 04, 2008, 09:08:02 PM
Unfortunately, the sun does not transfer heat via magic. It uses IR radiation, which means that the coriolis effect would mainly be formed where there is currently daylight. Also, you seem to think that wind will work just like gears, with a fairly good transfer ratio. They will interact weakly. Too weakly to form the coriolis effect. Also, nice change of track, previously you said it was the combined force of the stars. Which is it?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 04, 2008, 09:18:16 PM
Quote
Unfortunately, the sun does not transfer heat via magic. It uses IR radiation, which means that the coriolis effect would mainly be formed where there is currently daylight.

Over time the entire earth would be affected by the movements of the sun and stabilized and recurring wind patterns would emerge.

Quote
Also, you seem to think that wind will work just like gears, with a fairly good transfer ratio. They will interact weakly. Too weakly to form the coriolis effect.

The atoms and molecules in a wind current are attracted to each other through the electrostatic force, which is why very large wind currents can act as solid disks and spin around itself like a small version of a hurricane.

Quote
Also, nice change of track, previously you said it was the combined force of the stars. Which is it?

Probably a little bit of both.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 04, 2008, 09:37:05 PM
0.025 Newtons on a plane? 1 meter over an year? Nice. Wow. Wow oh wow. Winds are electrostatically charged? That is amazing. I never got a static shock when I go into the atmosphere. How many coloumbs? Negative or positive? Idiot.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 04, 2008, 10:00:29 PM
Quote
Winds are electrostatically charged? That is amazing. I never got a static shock when I go into the atmosphere. How many coloumbs? Negative or positive? Idiot.

How else do you believe wind systems are able to maintain their distinctive disk shapes without falling apart?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 04, 2008, 10:21:07 PM
Maybe(gasp!), the world is round! Seriously, you can easily measure static electricity, courtesy of a simple device(if I'm not mistaken, most multimeters). Go outside with one, and measure the coloumbs of the wind ::) Try again.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 04, 2008, 10:53:29 PM
Maybe(gasp!), the world is round! Seriously, you can easily measure static electricity, courtesy of a simple device(if I'm not mistaken, most multimeters). Go outside with one, and measure the coloumbs of the wind ::) Try again.

How exactly does a Round Earth cause or allow a wind system with a diameter of seventy miles or so to maintain its distinctive disk shape without falling apart?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: TheEngineer on January 05, 2008, 03:42:08 AM
I never got a static shock when I go into the atmosphere.
My plane does.   :(
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Lorcan on January 05, 2008, 12:04:36 PM
The Flat Earth does not spin. The Coriolis Effect can be explained as follows:

The two turnings of the winds between hemispheres create atmospheric "gears" with the teeth of these gears laying along the equator. The turning of the "gears" keep each other generally moving in opposite directions. Not literal gears, but ones consisting of wind currents rotating around a common center. When two wind currents moving in opposite directions collide at the equator it creates a reaction in accordance with Newtons third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The molecules of the air are shot outwards and away with a direction and magnitude directly opposite.

What sits over the equator to make this such a special area? The sun - which constantly imparts temperatures to the two hemispheres, rising pressure directly under its umbrella with its heat, gradually moving the winds within its circling spotlight outwards and away from the high pressures of the day out towards the low pressures of the night. It is analogous to a spoon churning a thick atmosphere in a vast mixing bowl. The spoon sifts through the atmosphere, imparting the molecules to its left in one direction, and imparting the molecules to its right in another. This effect builds up over time, creating predictable and recurring patterns of wind currents.

Here's an Illustration:

(http://www.dancad3d.com/D3022020.GIF)

Where the teeth connect over the equator represents the area where the sun is sucking in and spitting out wind as it raises temperature and pressure beneath its vicinity. Over the course of countless years the wind currents have become stable and predictable, colliding at the equator and keeping neighboring wind systems moving in opposite directions through gearing.

But this effect is still not yet universal. There are still wind currents which occasionally wander into opposing hemispheres, violating the principles of the Coriolis Effect.


That's a nice attempt at psuedoscience that a few FE proponents will probably say "makes a lot of sense" while in reality not understanding the implications you've made. This is all impossible, Tom, and obviously not supported by an ounce of empirical evidence. Your failed explanation also neglects many other features of wind in general.

The sun alone is not enough to create the types of wind we have on Earth. Your 1st grade explanation suggests that it is, and also imposes a lot of fairy tale, made up physics on the system in question.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Loard Z on January 05, 2008, 12:13:09 PM
Putdowns = fail.

Tom explained the Coriolis effect, and now you have to resort to insults instead of argument.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Lorcan on January 05, 2008, 12:22:55 PM
Calling pseudoscience what it is is not a put down.

Referring to a weak and laughable description of something that is very well understood using real data as a 1st grade explanation is also somewhat accurate, though I agree it is a put down.

But don't neglect the fact that I have also argued what Tom is suggesting. I argued that his explanation fails to explain the behavior of wind, and that the sun is not a proper mechanism for wind. I know you don't want me to elaborate because you won't read it anyway. If Tom requires elaboration, though, I will do it. But I've offered a little argument for him to reply to, anyway.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: skeptical scientist on January 05, 2008, 12:24:24 PM
Calling pseudoscience what it is is not a put down.
Well, it kind of is... It's just an accurate and well-deserved one.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Loard Z on January 05, 2008, 12:25:02 PM
I won't need it because I know what causes wind.

And I know it's not the sun.

It's obviously the DEF that causes it.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Lorcan on January 05, 2008, 12:27:01 PM
Calling pseudoscience what it is is not a put down.
Well, it kind of is... It's just an accurate and well-deserved one.

I suppose you're correct. It's not exactly flattering to have your theory called pseudoscience, but there's no better word for it.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 05, 2008, 02:21:50 PM
Putdowns = fail.

Tom explained the Coriolis effect, and now you have to resort to insults instead of argument.

What have I told you about depending on Tom? Trust me, there's a reliable counterpoint. Tom has implied that the air molecules have coloumbs. Which means that you should have a static shock when you go outside. Do you observe this? No. And RE gives an explanation for hurricanes, namely, the pressure gradient force, and the coriolis effect, which keeps storms together.

Oh, and engy, yes, sometimes planes do, but thats due to the speed that airplanes go through the air, which strips charge from the neutral air, and charges your plane and a bit of the air. It has nothing to do with anything Tom has said. Tom states that I should observe a static charge in the atmosphere, which I don't. Furthermore, that charge is unlikely to be able to produce the sort of circular pattern of a hurricane. Produce a theory if you must, but don't rely on Tom for anything. EVER.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 05, 2008, 02:43:50 PM
I won't need it because I know what causes wind.

And I know it's not the sun.

It's obviously the DEF that causes it.

Do you even know what your implying? Your implying that some magic thing is harnessing dark energy. Dark energy is the theory that some energy is required to have space, which makes no sense when talking about the wind. Don't be an idiot with nonsense pseudoscience. You have to resort to something that is not part of the standard model, and which is unconfirmed to even exist? You might as well talk about the giant turtle underneath the Earth... Even so, we would observe any DEF's gravitational effect, unless of course you deny gravitation, in which case I may refer you to the Cavendish experiment....
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Loard Z on January 05, 2008, 02:56:28 PM
I won't need it because I know what causes wind.

And I know it's not the sun.

It's obviously the DEF that causes it.

Do you even know what your implying? Your implying that some magic thing is harnessing dark energy. Dark energy is the theory that some energy is required to have space, which makes no sense when talking about the wind. Don't be an idiot with nonsense pseudoscience. You have to resort to something that is not part of the standard model, and which is unconfirmed to even exist? You might as well talk about the giant turtle underneath the Earth... Even so, we would observe any DEF's gravitational effect, unless of course you deny gravitation, in which case I may refer you to the Cavendish experiment....

Nope, I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about. I just think up this crazy shit all day while I'm on drugs and then laugh hilariously when you respond to it in all seriousness, hoping to convert me.

Or, wait. No, I do believe it. Yeah, that's the correct answer.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 05, 2008, 03:04:09 PM
Quote
What have I told you about depending on Tom? Trust me, there's a reliable counterpoint. Tom has implied that the air molecules have coloumbs. Which means that you should have a static shock when you go outside. Do you observe this? No. And RE gives an explanation for hurricanes, namely, the pressure gradient force, and the coriolis effect, which keeps storms together.

Uh, how does pressure and the Coriolis Effect on a Round Earth keep a wind system from falling apart?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 05, 2008, 05:45:00 PM
*sigh*. Once again you prove your idiocy. Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

The whole thing. Maybe you may learn something. For a change.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 05, 2008, 06:24:44 PM
Quote
*sigh*. Once again you prove your idiocy. Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

The whole thing. Maybe you may learn something. For a change.

That link doesn't tell us how wind systems are able to maintain their distinct disk shapes without falling apart. It just tells us that the Coriolis Effect compels the system to rotate in one direction rather than another.

So again, how do wind systems maintain their disk shapes without falling apart?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 05, 2008, 06:29:52 PM
Read the whole damn thing. Trust me, try harder. It's near the middle. I wanted you to learn something rather than dismiss it for a change. Maybe, one day, you'll thank me.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Roundy the Truthinessist on January 05, 2008, 06:44:27 PM
Why should he have to read an entire article just to appease you?  If you have a point to make, just quote it.  ::)
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Loard Z on January 05, 2008, 06:54:06 PM
Don't you know yet Roundy?

It's our job to get ranted and raved at by complete strangers for no reason, then to have to go and read articles that they suggest, then refute those arguments.

That's what we're here for, of course.

Welcome to FES ::)
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: fshy94 on January 05, 2008, 11:59:26 PM
Why should he have to read an entire article just to appease you?  If you have a point to make, just quote it.  ::)

Twofold. One, that's what he does when he gives sources, and second, my thing keeps crashing when I try to copy/paste. When I get back to a real computer, I'll post it. Its not that hard to find, really. Its near the middle, where it talks about storm systems.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 02, 2009, 09:32:55 PM
That link doesn't tell us how wind systems are able to maintain their distinct disk shapes without falling apart. It just tells us that the Coriolis Effect compels the system to rotate in one direction rather than another.

So again, how do wind systems maintain their disk shapes without falling apart?

Not quite sure what you mean by "maintain their disk shapes without falling apart" but I'm going to guess you mean that it doesn't provide an explanation for why the coriolis effect causes a circular motion of the winds that propel the currents in gyres? Rather than myself giving an explanation on this, I would suggest you read some of the sections in "Applied to Earth", particularly "Rotating sphere", "Meteorology" (Which speaks about the Rosbby number and your confusion on how the winds caused by the coriolis effect actually work), "Flow around a low-pressure area" and "Inertial circles".

I would also like to site an experiment by Ascher Shapiro (in the wikipedia article btw), in which the coriolis effect is even shown to exist in small scale water systems.

"Coriolis rotation can conceivably play a role on scales as small as a bathtub. It is a commonly held myth that the every-day rotation of a bathtub or toilet vortex is due to whether one is in the northern or southern hemisphere. An article in Nature, by Ascher Shapiro, describes an experiment in which all other forces to the system are removed by filling a 6 ft. tank with water and allowing it to settle for 24 hrs (to remove any internal velocity), in a room where the temperature has stabilized (temperature differences in the room can introduce forces inside the fluid). The drain plug is then very slowly removed, and tiny pieces of floating wood are used to observe rotation. During the first 12 to 15 mins, no rotation is observed. Then, a vortex appears and consistently begins to rotate in a counter-clockwise direction (the experiment was performed in the Northern hemisphere, in Boston, MA). This is repeated and the results averaged to make sure the effect is real. The Coriolis effect does indeed play a role in vortex rotation for draining liquids that have come to rest for a long time. ["Bath-Tub Vortex", Nature. Dec 15th, 1962. Vol 195, No. 4859, p. 1080-1081]"


---------------------Can you provide a better explanation for the existence of this?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: EarthIsSpherical on December 02, 2009, 09:47:34 PM
The Flat Earth does not spin. The Coriolis Effect can be explained as follows:

The two turnings of the winds between hemispheres create atmospheric "gears" with the teeth of these gears laying along the equator. The turning of the "gears" keep each other generally moving in opposite directions. Not literal gears, but ones consisting of wind currents rotating around a common center. When two wind currents moving in opposite directions collide at the equator it creates a reaction in accordance with Newtons third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The molecules of the air are shot outwards and away with a direction and magnitude directly opposite.

What sits over the equator to make this such a special area? The sun - which constantly imparts temperatures to the two hemispheres, rising pressure directly under its umbrella with its heat, gradually moving the winds within its circling spotlight outwards and away from the high pressures of the day out towards the low pressures of the night. It is analogous to a spoon churning a thick atmosphere in a vast mixing bowl. The spoon sifts through the atmosphere, imparting the molecules to its left in one direction, and imparting the molecules to its right in another. This effect builds up over time, creating predictable and recurring patterns of wind currents.

Here's an Illustration:

(http://www.dancad3d.com/D3022020.GIF)

Where the teeth connect over the equator represents the area where the sun is sucking in and spitting out wind as it raises temperature and pressure beneath its vicinity. Over the course of countless years the wind currents have become stable and predictable, colliding at the equator and keeping neighboring wind systems moving in opposite directions through gearing.

But this effect is still not yet universal. There are still wind currents which occasionally wander into opposing hemispheres, violating the principles of the Coriolis Effect.

Wait, the only way there could be a equator was if there was a circumference... So you beleive in the round earth
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 02, 2009, 10:39:17 PM
I think when hes referring to the equator, he isn't referring to the same thing as a round earthers are...
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: SupahLovah on December 03, 2009, 06:52:51 AM
Yeah, he means the FE equivalent.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 03, 2009, 07:29:04 AM
Why was this moved to Q&A? Too old of a topic to revive? Or is it because people are just asking for a model from FErs? Because I mean, the lack of evidence FErs have for this could be considered evidence for RErs.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: SupahLovah on December 03, 2009, 07:40:22 AM
Now, heres one I want to hear answered. How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved? And remember, the Coriolis effect affects hurricanes and so on, so it certainly exists. Well?
Looks like a question to me.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 04, 2009, 01:26:01 AM
Now, heres one I want to hear answered. How do FE'ers explain the Coriolis effect without the Earth being curved? And remember, the Coriolis effect affects hurricanes and so on, so it certainly exists. Well?
Looks like a question to me.

Oki, well then continue away with an explanation for water drainage please.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: markjo on December 04, 2009, 05:34:51 AM
Oki, well then continue away with an explanation for water drainage please.

Water swirling down a drain is affected more by the shape of the plumbing and any residual currents in the water than by the shape or rotation of the earth.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 04, 2009, 11:47:50 AM
Oki, well then continue away with an explanation for water drainage please.

Water swirling down a drain is affected more by the shape of the plumbing and any residual currents in the water than by the shape or rotation of the earth.

I do not disagree with that. I'm referring to the controlled experiment done by Ascher Shapiro I presented on the previous page, in which a draining liquid formed a vortex regardless of the various measures of control, leading us to believe that this coriolis effect myth might actually have some merit.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Viper-X on December 04, 2009, 04:09:47 PM
The Flat Earth does not spin. The Coriolis Effect can be explained as follows:

The two turnings of the winds between hemispheres create atmospheric "gears" with the teeth of these gears laying along the equator. The turning of the "gears" keep each other generally moving in opposite directions. Not literal gears, but ones consisting of wind currents rotating around a common center. When two wind currents moving in opposite directions collide at the equator it creates a reaction in accordance with Newtons third law: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The molecules of the air are shot outwards and away with a direction and magnitude directly opposite.

What sits over the equator to make this such a special area? The sun - which constantly imparts temperatures to the two hemispheres, rising pressure directly under its umbrella with its heat, gradually moving the winds within its circling spotlight outwards and away from the high pressures of the day out towards the low pressures of the night. It is analogous to a spoon churning a thick atmosphere in a vast mixing bowl. The spoon sifts through the atmosphere, imparting the molecules to its left in one direction, and imparting the molecules to its right in another. This effect builds up over time, creating predictable and recurring patterns of wind currents.

Here's an Illustration:

(http://www.dancad3d.com/D3022020.GIF)

Where the teeth connect over the equator represents the area where the sun is sucking in and spitting out wind as it raises temperature and pressure beneath its vicinity. Over the course of countless years the wind currents have become stable and predictable, colliding at the equator and keeping neighboring wind systems moving in opposite directions through gearing.

But this effect is still not yet universal. There are still wind currents which occasionally wander into opposing hemispheres, violating the principles of the Coriolis Effect.

Tom, is this your occupation? I mean do people buy things online, click adds, etc... that makes you your living? I'm just curious.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 07, 2009, 07:41:06 PM
Bump? I would like more to be added to this FE hypothesis
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 10, 2009, 12:44:14 AM
Come on! Clearly a wind explanation doesn't account for a coriolis effect that is present in a windless environment.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: SupahLovah on December 11, 2009, 09:49:49 AM
How did he make the drain hole in the bucket? Was it conducted in a sealed container?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 11, 2009, 05:52:46 PM
How did he make the drain hole in the bucket? Was it conducted in a sealed container?

It said in the wikipedia article that he "The drain plug is then very slowly removed", which isn't an answer, but they cited the article so I'm sure it will have those details on the website.

Here is the wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect#Draining_in_bathtubs_and_toilets

"Coriolis rotation can conceivably play a role on scales as small as a bathtub. It is a commonly held myth that the every-day rotation of a bathtub or toilet vortex is due to whether one is in the northern or southern hemisphere. An article in Nature, by Ascher Shapiro, describes an experiment in which all other forces to the system are removed by filling a 6 ft. tank with water and allowing it to settle for 24 hrs (to remove any internal velocity), in a room where the temperature has stabilized (temperature differences in the room can introduce forces inside the fluid). The drain plug is then very slowly removed, and tiny pieces of floating wood are used to observe rotation. During the first 12 to 15 mins, no rotation is observed. Then, a vortex appears and consistently begins to rotate in a counter-clockwise direction (the experiment was performed in the Northern hemisphere, in Boston, MA). This is repeated and the results averaged to make sure the effect is real. The Coriolis effect does indeed play a role in vortex rotation for draining liquids that have come to rest for a long time. ["Bath-Tub Vortex", Nature. Dec 15th, 1962. Vol 195, No. 4859, p. 1080-1081]"
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 14, 2009, 01:36:20 PM
Another bump, because I don't feel it should take this long to think up some bullshit like Bishop did.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Viper-X on December 15, 2009, 07:47:19 PM
When I found out that the direction of water draining due to the Coriolis effect was a myth, I was baffled. I guess since I heard about the effect so young on the "Simpsons", it just forced its way into my mind. To think of it, Simpsons would be the perfect media outlet to brainwash the youth... So thank you for posting that article. I'm very glad to know that the same people who told me that are also under a belief of a myth, that the effect doesn't exist at all.

It does raise some important questions... But I've found only scrutiny after asking such questions. Or making forceful but accurate points...lol
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: SupahLovah on December 16, 2009, 07:23:36 AM
How did he make the drain hole in the bucket? Was it conducted in a sealed container?

It said in the wikipedia article that he "The drain plug is then very slowly removed", which isn't an answer, but they cited the article so I'm sure it will have those details on the website.

Here is the wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect#Draining_in_bathtubs_and_toilets

"Coriolis rotation can conceivably play a role on scales as small as a bathtub. It is a commonly held myth that the every-day rotation of a bathtub or toilet vortex is due to whether one is in the northern or southern hemisphere. An article in Nature, by Ascher Shapiro, describes an experiment in which all other forces to the system are removed by filling a 6 ft. tank with water and allowing it to settle for 24 hrs (to remove any internal velocity), in a room where the temperature has stabilized (temperature differences in the room can introduce forces inside the fluid). The drain plug is then very slowly removed, and tiny pieces of floating wood are used to observe rotation. During the first 12 to 15 mins, no rotation is observed. Then, a vortex appears and consistently begins to rotate in a counter-clockwise direction (the experiment was performed in the Northern hemisphere, in Boston, MA). This is repeated and the results averaged to make sure the effect is real. The Coriolis effect does indeed play a role in vortex rotation for draining liquids that have come to rest for a long time. ["Bath-Tub Vortex", Nature. Dec 15th, 1962. Vol 195, No. 4859, p. 1080-1081]"

When I went to watch a video cited, it wouldn't load for me on my work computer. :( I'll check out other citations.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 23, 2009, 06:37:42 PM
I demand my conspiracy theory for wishy water
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: SupahLovah on December 23, 2009, 06:47:40 PM
Conspiracy addition noted!
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Euclid on December 24, 2009, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: Euclid
As is convention on this forum, the term gravity refers to the Newtonian force of universal gravitation.  Newtonian gravitation has since been superceded by General Relativity in which the phenomenon of universal gravitation is described by the curvature of spacetime through which gravity becomes a ficticious force in the same class as the of other pseudoforces like the centrifugal force.  Thus, the claim that gravity does not exist is always correct regardless of RE or FE, as long as one takes the conventional definitions on this forum.

The issue of whether General Relativity is a valid theory is up to debate among FE'ers.  Some, most notably James, discount it completely.  I believe, along with most, that it is the best theory for universal gravitation, and it is entirely applicable for explaining FE phenomena.  Among the phenomena predicted by General relativity is "gravitomagnetism".

The phenomenon of gravitomagnetism is easiest understood in terms of the old-fashioned concept of a gravitomagnetic field, in which gravitation is treated as a force.  It is similar to a magnetic field, except that in the case that moving charges create a magnetic field, moving masses create a gravitomagnetic field.  In the presence of a gravitomagnetic field, objects feel a force given by the Lorentz formula

F =  2 m v/c x Bg

where Bg is the gravitomagnetic field vector and v is the velocity vector of the object on which the force is acting.  This is incredibly similar to the formula for the Coriolis force,

F = 2 m v x ?.

Therefore, all that is required to simulate the Coriolis force is a gravitomagnetic field of similar magnitude to the quantity of ?c, where ? is the angular velocity of the RE.

And incidentally, there is a source that can create such a gravitomagnetic field, the rotating heavens.  Taken to be a roughly uniform rotating disk, the cosmos will create a nearly uniform gravitomagnetic field on the surface of the Earth, which we may take to be the cause of many phenomena attributed to the Coriolis force.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on December 24, 2009, 12:03:46 PM
Quote from: Euclid
As is convention on this forum, the term gravity refers to the Newtonian force of universal gravitation.  Newtonian gravitation has since been superceded by General Relativity in which the phenomenon of universal gravitation is described by the curvature of spacetime through which gravity becomes a ficticious force in the same class as the of other pseudoforces like the centrifugal force.  Thus, the claim that gravity does not exist is always correct regardless of RE or FE, as long as one takes the conventional definitions on this forum.

The issue of whether General Relativity is a valid theory is up to debate among FE'ers.  Some, most notably James, discount it completely.  I believe, along with most, that it is the best theory for universal gravitation, and it is entirely applicable for explaining FE phenomena.  Among the phenomena predicted by General relativity is "gravitomagnetism".

The phenomenon of gravitomagnetism is easiest understood in terms of the old-fashioned concept of a gravitomagnetic field, in which gravitation is treated as a force.  It is similar to a magnetic field, except that in the case that moving charges create a magnetic field, moving masses create a gravitomagnetic field.  In the presence of a gravitomagnetic field, objects feel a force given by the Lorentz formula

F =  2 m v/c x Bg

where Bg is the gravitomagnetic field vector and v is the velocity vector of the object on which the force is acting.  This is incredibly similar to the formula for the Coriolis force,

F = 2 m v x ?.

Therefore, all that is required to simulate the Coriolis force is a gravitomagnetic field of similar magnitude to the quantity of ?c, where ? is the angular velocity of the RE.

And incidentally, there is a source that can create such a gravitomagnetic field, the rotating heavens.  Taken to be a roughly uniform rotating disk, the cosmos will create a nearly uniform gravitomagnetic field on the surface of the Earth, which we may take to be the cause of many phenomena attributed to the Coriolis force.

Then why does the water rotate in different directions depending on what hemisphere your in?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Euclid on December 24, 2009, 12:45:10 PM
Because the the heavens rotate in the opposite direction in the other hemi"sphere".
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on January 02, 2010, 12:14:13 AM
Because the the heavens rotate in the opposite direction in the other hemi"sphere".

So there are two different heavens, one in one hemisphere and one in the other?
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: markjo on January 02, 2010, 07:47:20 AM
Because the the heavens rotate in the opposite direction in the other hemi"sphere".

So there are two different heavens, one in one hemisphere and one in the other?

Depending on which "unofficial" FE map you use, the southern hemi-plane sometimes requires a system of identical "celestial gears" in order to work.
Title: Re: What about...the Coriolis effect?
Post by: Sadistic on January 05, 2010, 04:15:01 PM
So something like this eh?

(http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z237/hwhoe1/munmun/Untitled-2.jpg)