The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: efrohi on October 06, 2014, 03:16:27 AM

Title: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: efrohi on October 06, 2014, 03:16:27 AM
This Picture is strange ... look how the Gravity bent the left Arm of the Astronaut Gerst ...  ;D

http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html (http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html)
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: efrohi on October 06, 2014, 05:49:37 AM
Can someone explain me this special effects ? (http://)

For a G Zero Plane it took to much Time ... is it made with modern special fx ? Someone Idea ?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Son of Orospu on October 06, 2014, 12:21:18 PM
Perhaps 0g distorts light. 
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: inquisitive on October 06, 2014, 02:06:25 PM
This Picture is strange ... look how the Gravity bent the left Arm of the Astronaut Gerst ...  ;D

http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html (http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html)
Camera lens, as you know.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: efrohi on October 06, 2014, 11:16:11 PM
I have 2 Questions:

1. Is the Gravity (perhaps there is no Gravity at all, if the Earth is going "Upwards") in high Alltitude the same like on the Surface?

2. Is the Light from the Moon coming from the Sun ? And when yes, and the earth is not round, why we see light on the moon but not the sun, at the same time. I didn´t found nothing about it, i´m still searching.

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: macrohard on October 07, 2014, 12:46:25 PM
1.  No.  Gravity decreases the further away from the earth you travel.

2. Yes. Mostly.  Light from the sun bounces and scatters off the moon.  A very very very small portion of the moon's light is from the sun bouncing off the earth, to the moon, and back to the earth.

I'm not too clear on your follow-up question in part two. Sorry.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: efrohi on October 07, 2014, 11:09:57 PM
@macrohard

how you know that, with the Gravity ? In 40 km (Baumgartner) was no less Gravity at all i think. in which alltitude we can a change ?

i found something about lunar eclipse. have to read it first ...
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: dephelis on October 08, 2014, 02:14:08 PM
@macrohard

how you know that, with the Gravity ? In 40 km (Baumgartner) was no less Gravity at all i think. in which alltitude we can a change ?

i found something about lunar eclipse. have to read it first ...

Because it has been measured directly.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: FlatOrange on October 28, 2014, 10:03:54 PM
This Picture is strange ... look how the Gravity bent the left Arm of the Astronaut Gerst ...  ;D

http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html (http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Gerst-steigt-aus-ins-All-article13727361.html)

Can't you embed the picture? I went to the site you linked and I have no idea what is wrong with any of the pictures I see. Perhaps you mean his right arm?

A little work on your OP goes a long ways.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: WBimmer on June 12, 2015, 06:37:40 PM
Looks like she's hanging upside down and that's what is making her face go red.  Or maybe her face is red because she was outside tanning recently...

She mentions having to wash the dirt out.  Isn't the ISS supposed to be sealed and clean, so where is the dirt coming from.  It's not like she's living in Kansas and surrounded by a dust bowl…

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 12, 2015, 08:44:28 PM
I don't see any problems with the hair washing video,   but then,  unless you have had to wash your hair in space, how would you know?

Don't see anything funny about the Gerst pictures either,   which picture were we supposed to look at?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 12, 2015, 09:15:21 PM
Looks like she's hanging upside down and that's what is making her face go red.  Or maybe her face is red because she was outside tanning recently...

She mentions having to wash the dirt out.  Isn't the ISS supposed to be sealed and clean, so where is the dirt coming from.  It's not like she's living in Kansas and surrounded by a dust bowl…

The skepticism is palpable. I love it. Please continue.

@macrohard

how you know that, with the Gravity ? In 40 km (Baumgartner) was no less Gravity at all i think. in which alltitude we can a change ?

i found something about lunar eclipse. have to read it first ...

Gravity decreases the farther you get away from the center of the Earth. This has been measured at different altitudes and even just at different points on Earth (it's not a perfect sphere).
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: modestman on June 12, 2015, 09:26:00 PM
Looks like she's hanging upside down and that's what is making her face go red.  Or maybe her face is red because she was outside tanning recently...

She mentions having to wash the dirt out.  Isn't the ISS supposed to be sealed and clean, so where is the dirt coming from.  It's not like she's living in Kansas and surrounded by a dust bowl…

The skepticism is palpable. I love it. Please continue.

@macrohard

how you know that, with the Gravity ? In 40 km (Baumgartner) was no less Gravity at all i think. in which alltitude we can a change ?

i found something about lunar eclipse. have to read it first ...

Gravity decreases the farther you get away from the center of the Earth. This has been measured at different altitudes and even just at different points on Earth (it's not a perfect sphere).
it's not perfect sphere it's tilt it's wobbling it's rotating how can it be more complicated and less elegant ?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 13, 2015, 11:19:08 PM
Looks like she's hanging upside down and that's what is making her face go red.  Or maybe her face is red because she was outside tanning recently...

She mentions having to wash the dirt out.  Isn't the ISS supposed to be sealed and clean, so where is the dirt coming from.  It's not like she's living in Kansas and surrounded by a dust bowl…

The skepticism is palpable. I love it. Please continue.

@macrohard

how you know that, with the Gravity ? In 40 km (Baumgartner) was no less Gravity at all i think. in which alltitude we can a change ?

i found something about lunar eclipse. have to read it first ...

Gravity decreases the farther you get away from the center of the Earth. This has been measured at different altitudes and even just at different points on Earth (it's not a perfect sphere).
it's not perfect sphere it's tilt it's wobbling it's rotating how can it be more complicated and less elegant ?

News flash: The real world isn't all bubble gum and rainbows. Physics is complicated. Not everything is going to conform to your perfect view of the universe because you want it to, it's going to continue to be complicated. Any student who has taken a high school physics class can tell you that.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: WBimmer on June 14, 2015, 07:05:22 AM
News flash: The real world isn't all bubble gum and rainbows. Physics is complicated. Not everything is going to conform to your perfect view of the universe because you want it to, it's going to continue to be complicated. Any student who has taken a high school physics class can tell you that.


Or maybe the likes of Newton, Einstein and Hawking where purposely employed to make physics complicated so that the average person couldn't see through the lie, when in actual fact it is all very simple.  People have a habit of making things much harder than it really is.

My eye clearly sees she's upside down and I do not need a physics degree to prove or disprove what I see.

I actually found high school physics rather easy, but just a waste of time as none of what I learnt applies to my real life.  In reflection, all of the education system was a waste of time, but that is what it's meant to be.

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Techros on June 14, 2015, 08:14:17 AM
News flash: The real world isn't all bubble gum and rainbows. Physics is complicated. Not everything is going to conform to your perfect view of the universe because you want it to, it's going to continue to be complicated. Any student who has taken a high school physics class can tell you that.


Or maybe the likes of Newton, Einstein and Hawking where purposely employed to make physics complicated so that the average person couldn't see through the lie, when in actual fact it is all very simple. 
Then why teach physics in school if they don't want anyone to understand it?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: WBimmer on June 14, 2015, 09:32:34 AM
News flash: The real world isn't all bubble gum and rainbows. Physics is complicated. Not everything is going to conform to your perfect view of the universe because you want it to, it's going to continue to be complicated. Any student who has taken a high school physics class can tell you that.


Or maybe the likes of Newton, Einstein and Hawking where purposely employed to make physics complicated so that the average person couldn't see through the lie, when in actual fact it is all very simple. 
Then why teach physics in school if they don't want anyone to understand it?

Because that is how they keep reinforcing the program and ensuring people believe in the lie.  You have to keep passing on the lie to generation after generation, otherwise it looses it's effect on control.

Let's imagine for fun that school didn't teach physics and all of the other subjects and just taught people the earth is flat and the centre of the universe.  Regardless of whether or not this is true, you'd have everyone believing the world is flat and nobody would question it, as they don't question anything today either.

School is simply a system to indoctrinate and program the young mind into believing and accepting the rules and beliefs of society and making them into good subjects to move into the corporate world to participate in the corporate game, to support the elite in their own agendas, whatever they may be.

Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on June 14, 2015, 10:05:51 AM
Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.
I'm guessing you don't work as a structural engineer.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Misero on June 14, 2015, 10:06:50 AM
How did you learn the equation for force on the swings?  ???
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Googleotomy on June 14, 2015, 07:01:11 PM
Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.
I'm guessing you don't work as a structural engineer.

I'm just guessing that he doesn't work in anything in the real world ? You certainly have to use a lot of physics and math to make things work in the real world.
I would never have gotten a job in the first place if I hadn't learned a lot of things in school in the first place. What  kind of a resume' does this guy have ?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 14, 2015, 09:41:31 PM

Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

I agree you learned nothing,  and it shows.    If you understood a little of why things work, then you wouldn't be fooled so easily.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: DonaldC on June 15, 2015, 01:20:38 AM
Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

What do you think informs knowledge and theory? Experience, observations, experiments. Good grief.

Glad my physics degree is a waste of time and everything I learned is lies. Good to know the real genius is here on TFES.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 15, 2015, 01:22:09 AM
Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

What do you think informs knowledge and theory? Experience, observations, experiments. Good grief.

Glad my physics degree is a waste of time and everything I learned is lies. Good to know the real genius is here on TFES.

You don't have a Physics degree.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 15, 2015, 05:11:42 AM
Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

What do you think informs knowledge and theory? Experience, observations, experiments. Good grief.

Glad my physics degree is a waste of time and everything I learned is lies. Good to know the real genius is here on TFES.

You don't have a Physics degree.

I think he was attempting sarcasm,  in response to  Wbummer's  comments about the value of education,  and yes I believe he probably does have a physics degree.

Sarcasm,  is a tricky thing to master, in an on-line forum,  quite often you will be taken literally, when the opposite is intended.   Best avoided, if possible.

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 15, 2015, 03:17:08 PM
Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

What do you think informs knowledge and theory? Experience, observations, experiments. Good grief.

Glad my physics degree is a waste of time and everything I learned is lies. Good to know the real genius is here on TFES.

You don't have a Physics degree.

I think he was attempting sarcasm,  in response to  Wbummer's  comments about the value of education,  and yes I believe he probably does have a physics degree.

Sarcasm,  is a tricky thing to master, in an on-line forum,  quite often you will be taken literally, when the opposite is intended.   Best avoided, if possible.

Ah that makes more sense.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: LuggerSailor on June 16, 2015, 04:53:54 AM

Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

So, did you ever try kicking the roundabout hub?
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63831.0 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63831.0)


Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: mikewolf13 on June 16, 2015, 06:29:13 AM

Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

So quite simply you believe you are more qualified at physics than someone who studied and has a degree in physics becuase you played on a playground?

Kids on the playground also learn about cuts, scrapes, cooties and boo boos...are they more qualified to be doctors?

When your experiences get measured...the experience is not negated but you might start to gain knowledge.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Art on June 16, 2015, 06:59:57 AM
All those people, Einstein, Newton, etc. gave things context and made things simpler, not more complicated.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 16, 2015, 09:56:24 PM
Gravity decreases the farther you get away from the center of the Earth. This has been measured at different altitudes and even just at different points on Earth (it's not a perfect sphere).

"Earth's gravitation" appears to decrease as you rise closer to the celestial bodies, which is only natural, as you become more influenced by celestial gravitation.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 17, 2015, 03:06:35 AM
Gravity decreases the farther you get away from the center of the Earth. This has been measured at different altitudes and even just at different points on Earth (it's not a perfect sphere).

"Earth's gravitation" appears to decrease as you rise closer to the celestial bodies, which is only natural, as you become more influenced by celestial gravitation.

Remember, we're not talking about elevation here. Sea level is just a different distance to the core at the poles than it is at the equator. So are you suggesting there is bulge (that peaks at the equator) around the flat Earth?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 18, 2015, 04:32:08 AM
One of the things you just said was it happens at different altitudes. Now you're telling me that you're not talking about altitude or elevation.  :-\   Why do globularists have such problems keeping their thoughts straight?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 18, 2015, 11:46:26 AM
One of the things you just said was it happens at different altitudes. Now you're telling me that you're not talking about altitude or elevation.  :-\   Why do globularists have such problems keeping their thoughts straight?

It's hard to keep your thoughts straight when you're hanging out with a bunch of tinfoil-hatters.

Basically, we can detect differences in the gravitational field with a gravimeter. Two ways we can detect this are:
- Change altitude
- Stay at same altitude (sea level for example), but go somewhere else on Earth.

You "explained" the first scenario, but you can't explain the second, or why measuring the G-field around the Earth matches what we would expect on an oblate spheroid.
The only explanation would be: "there is bulge (that peaks at the equator) around the flat Earth"
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 18, 2015, 08:07:06 PM

-Change altitude: increasing proximity to celestial bodies
-"Go somewhere else on earth": moving in relation to celestial bodies

Why is that inexplicable to you?

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 18, 2015, 08:16:29 PM

-Change altitude: increasing proximity to celestial bodies
-"Go somewhere else on earth": moving in relation to celestial bodies

Why is that inexplicable to you?
This
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gravity_of_Earth#Comparative_gravities_in_various_cities_around_the_world

I don't see correlation. The rest of the article says you are wrong as well.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 18, 2015, 08:21:15 PM
Plus there is this thread where I show you can't have variances on a flat earth.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63935.0#.VYOKm0brDEo (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63935.0#.VYOKm0brDEo)
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 18, 2015, 08:27:04 PM
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.

Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 18, 2015, 10:34:08 PM
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.

Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)

No need for commentary. It supplements my statement above.
The gravitational variances around the world match exactly what we would expect on an oblate spheroid Earth. To explain this we have two possibilities:
-The Earth is an oblate spheroid.
-"moving in relation to celestial bodies", whatever that means.

... Occam's Razor yadda yadda...

Oh and in that thread nowhere did I see "a lack of elementary physics understanding", nice try though.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 19, 2015, 05:57:05 AM
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.
kinda thought it explained itself. Gravitational measurements that show no correlation to altitude.
Quote
Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)
Yet you couldn't. Feel free to back up your claim. Or just be a typical fe'er and not be able to back anything up. Whatever.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 19, 2015, 02:39:22 PM
No need for commentary. It supplements my statement above.
The gravitational variances around the world match exactly what we would expect on an oblate spheroid Earth. To explain this we have two possibilities:
-The Earth is an oblate spheroid.
-"moving in relation to celestial bodies", whatever that means.

It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?


Quote
Oh and in that thread nowhere did I see "a lack of elementary physics understanding", nice try though.

If you feel comfortable admitting such, that's fine by me.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 19, 2015, 02:42:12 PM
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.

If you feel comfortable admitting such, that's fine by me.

K
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 19, 2015, 03:17:05 PM
Ski seems to have ignored my post. Maybe he can't explain why Denver with an altitude of 5280 feet has gravity that is more or similar to cities that are at sea level.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Mikey T. on June 19, 2015, 03:33:11 PM
Did I just see a flat Earther claim that someone else has a lack of basic elementary physics?  Seriously.
So lets see how that works then.
Please elaborate why the centrifugal force of the Earths spin at the equator matches with the decrease in expected gravity in that area for the distance from the center of the sphere?  Do you understand how the forces can counteract?
We will just stay on this for a second while you show your vast understanding of physics.  Please continue.
If it is the increase in celestial objects that "pull" you away from the Earth in those areas, what is this force then?  Gravity of a sufficiently size and density (incase you don't understand density it is the amount of mass concentrated in relation to the space it occupies), would actually form into a ball. 
So are you saying you believe in gravity but only part?  If so how do you explain how these celestial objects that exert enough gravity to counteract Earths gravity in a significant enough way to change measurements, are spherical in nature?  Or is it more of the aether magical stuff?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 19, 2015, 06:38:00 PM
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 19, 2015, 09:01:42 PM
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
So still no rebuttal against the massive amount of evidence against your claims?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: 11cookeaw1 on June 20, 2015, 10:21:21 AM
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
Prove it
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 20, 2015, 04:58:31 PM
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: 11cookeaw1 on June 22, 2015, 03:33:10 PM
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
Can you provide evidence for the existence of daily fluctuations of axles at one part per say... 10000. If you can't, then your model is most certainly wrong.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Son of Orospu on June 24, 2015, 07:34:22 PM
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
Can you provide evidence for the existence of daily fluctuations of axles at one part per say... 10000. If you can't, then your model is most certainly wrong.

Huh?  ???  He just did; gravitation, as observed by tides.  Did you just pop in here without reading the thread?  Get on your game or NASA will fire you for sure. 
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: sokarul on June 24, 2015, 10:14:26 PM
How does an object have a different acceleration than the earth's acceleration and not float away?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 24, 2015, 11:07:08 PM
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???

What gravitational model are you proposing?   Doesn't sound like denspressure,  doesn't sound like UA,  so what is your flat earth gravity model?

Tides forces are the natural result of diverging gravitational field lines.   Stretching longitudinally and compressing across the field direction.
Tidal forces in a uniform gravitational field are zero,  therefore tides are not possible under UA.

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 25, 2015, 03:50:41 AM
How does an object have a different acceleration than the earth's acceleration and not float away?

I find it difficult to believe that you are being deliberately obtuse.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on June 25, 2015, 05:08:30 AM
If the earth is hurtling along at an arse hair off the speed of light, and constantly accelerating, then any variations in g, whether they are caused by "celestial bodies" or mass migrations of tooth fairies, would cause the planet to tear apart in nano seconds.

UA is simply incompatible with measured variations in g across the earth's surface, and therefore falsified.  You need to up with something that matches observations.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 25, 2015, 05:36:18 AM
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.

Further I believe I've addressed variations in measured values of 'g' to any competent person's understanding.

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on June 25, 2015, 09:19:33 AM
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Quote
Further I believe I've addressed variations in measured values of 'g' to any competent person's understanding.
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 25, 2015, 07:30:30 PM
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Why isn't the earth being torn apart in RET?  And why are you using the term "relativistic velocity" in this context?


Quote
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....   
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Alpha2Omega on June 25, 2015, 08:51:58 PM
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Why isn't the earth being torn apart in RET?  And why are you using the term "relativistic velocity" in this context?

Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, but this varies slightly depending on where (and how far from the center of the Earth) you are. UA has the flat earth itself accelerating "upward" at 9.8 m/s2. If this varies over the surface (it's  does), then part of Earth is accelerating at a higher rate than another, which means the areas with higher acceleration at the surface (the poles vs. the Equator) will be traveling faster and cover more distance in a finite amount of time.

The measured difference in the acceleration of gravity at sea level at the Equator is about 0.5% less than at the poles.

Since distance traveled, s, is s = at2/2, then after one day (86400 seconds):

sequator = 9.7755 m/s2 (86400 sec)2/2
 = 36,486,858,000 m
 = 36,486,858 km

spole = 9.8245 m/s2 (86400 sec)2/2
 = 36,669,750,000 m
 = 36,669,750 km

Meaning the polar regions have traveled "upward" 182,892 km further than the equatorial regions after a single day. Given that even the young-earth crowd puts the age of the Earth at several thousand years, it seems like this would be somewhat of a problem.

Quote
Quote
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.

Yep. The regions with just slightly lower acceleration would lag other regions by almost 200,000 km in very short order.

Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 25, 2015, 09:41:31 PM
Not that I'm defending UA,  but the only way I could see it working is if the flat earth was orbiting something,  at a radius and velocity that would provide 1g of centripetal acceleration,  the flat side would have to always facing towards the center,  that way you could have 1g without ever reaching relativistic velocities.   Differential gravity would still be a problem.

The bigger problem for UA, in my opinion is tidal forces,  you don't get tidal forces without divergence in the gravitational field,  and a flat earth gravitational field doesn't diverge ergo, no tides.

The other thing not mentioned so far, is that geological gravitational surveys are commonly used in prospecting,  the technique is to map tiny gravitational variances caused by different density ore bodies.   

Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 25, 2015, 09:43:54 PM
Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, ..

I'm going to try to gently help you and say that apparent acceleration of you is toward the earth in both models. I'll let you figure the rest out on your own, seeing as how you are so much smarter than me.


Quote
No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity, first. Second, you're missing a good deal of thought about frames therein lies a good deal of your (plural) problems with the rubbish about relativistic velocities at all affecting the earth.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Alpha2Omega on June 25, 2015, 10:01:35 PM
Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, ..

I'm going to try to gently help you and say that apparent acceleration of you is toward the earth in both models. I'll let you figure the rest out on your own, seeing as how you are so much smarter than me.

No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.

Quote
Quote
No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity, first. Second, you're missing a good deal of thought about frames therein lies a good deal of your (plural) problems with the rubbish about relativistic velocities at all affecting the earth.

Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 25, 2015, 10:04:44 PM
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Alpha2Omega on June 26, 2015, 08:00:29 AM
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity

I haven't seen your "correct" formula for velocity yet. Would you mind providing it?
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Ski on June 26, 2015, 07:11:54 PM
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity

I haven't seen your "correct" formula for velocity yet.

That doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that you still manage to feel it appropriate to "educate" me.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Alpha2Omega on June 26, 2015, 09:36:27 PM
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity

I haven't seen your "correct" formula for velocity yet.

That doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that you still manage to feel it appropriate to "educate" me.

What doesn't surprise you?

I'm still waiting for your "correct" formula for velocity. Can you provide it, please? You were the one who said my formula was wrong. Remember?

Is 844.6 km/sec (less than 0.3% the speed of light) relativistic?

I'm the one waiting to be educated.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: JerkFace on June 26, 2015, 10:44:16 PM
That doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that you still manage to feel it appropriate to "educate" me.

Seems to me your the one in dire need of some education. 
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Bill_the_Pretender on June 27, 2015, 04:40:44 PM
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity

I haven't seen your "correct" formula for velocity yet.

That doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that you still manage to feel it appropriate to "educate" me.

You desperately need to be educated.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Dog on June 27, 2015, 08:50:02 PM
That doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that you still manage to feel it appropriate to "educate" me.

Well considering you're displaying profound ignorance to physics and logic, you really do need to be educated.
Title: Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
Post by: Poko on June 28, 2015, 04:36:44 PM
News flash: The real world isn't all bubble gum and rainbows. Physics is complicated. Not everything is going to conform to your perfect view of the universe because you want it to, it's going to continue to be complicated. Any student who has taken a high school physics class can tell you that.


Or maybe the likes of Newton, Einstein and Hawking where purposely employed to make physics complicated so that the average person couldn't see through the lie, when in actual fact it is all very simple. 
Then why teach physics in school if they don't want anyone to understand it?

Because that is how they keep reinforcing the program and ensuring people believe in the lie.  You have to keep passing on the lie to generation after generation, otherwise it looses it's effect on control.

Let's imagine for fun that school didn't teach physics and all of the other subjects and just taught people the earth is flat and the centre of the universe.  Regardless of whether or not this is true, you'd have everyone believing the world is flat and nobody would question it, as they don't question anything today either.

School is simply a system to indoctrinate and program the young mind into believing and accepting the rules and beliefs of society and making them into good subjects to move into the corporate world to participate in the corporate game, to support the elite in their own agendas, whatever they may be.

Thinking back to my childhood and adolescence, i learned nothing in school of any value and all of my valued learnings came from my own personal experiences.  As a kid playing on the swings and roundabouts taught me more about physics than any high school class did.  Climbing trees and jumping off roofs gave me plenty of lessons about how heavy objects like to fall down and the higher you go, the higher the impact.  I do not care about the math of why this is, i just know it exists and that's all that matters. 

Experience trumps knowledge and theory.

Not only do we know that the higher you fall from, the harder the fall, but we can use mathematics to determine exactly how hard the fall is. These are the same mathematics that we use to construct airplanes, skyscrapers. These things were not built with intuition or experience. The only reason we were able to build these things is because of the precision and predictive capabilities of maths and physics, precision and predictive capabilities that intuition simply does not provide. We can not expect to get far as a society technologically if our scientists and engineers base their models on intuition instead of maths.