Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - levitator

Pages: [1] 2
1
I can assure you, guys, that after I've taken a shower, the water most definitely sticks to me - until I've towelled myself down.

But "You're gonna need a bigger towel" to mop up the oceans....

2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 05, 2020, 02:57:39 AM »
Talking of Jupiter, I don't know if you are familiar with the brands of Takahashi and TMB.  Both 'top end' refractors. I have had the privilege of owning at different times both a TMB 6" f8 triplet refractor and the slightly faster (shorter focal length) F7.3 Tak TOA150 (£14k scope brand new).
I'm afraid my 'scopes are rather more modest!  A 250mm Newtonian (Orion Optics on Vixen mount) which I've had now for over 15 years, plus a Williams Optics ZS61 APO - bought only last year.  I'm thinking of flogging the refractor (once the CV lockdown is over!) - I bought it specifically because it's very portable and I wanted something for the Total Eclipse in Argentina/Chile last year.

As it happens, my camera battery gave out about 5 seconds before second contact, so I got no images of totality!  Was I gutted!!!  At least I got a splendid view of totality with my MK1 eyeballs, aided with my MK2 bins.  But no record!  :'( :'( :'(
[edit]:  This is the last piccy I got:


Do you do any eclipse-chasing yourself?  We did the Indonesia one in 2016 (successfully), and also attempted the 1999 one from France (total washout).  Didn't go to the USA one in 2017, but some of our friends did and had an excellent time....

Memo - back on topic.  I see FE'ers are doing their best to explain southern hemisphere star movements.  How do they explain eclipses in the Southern Hemisphere?

3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 05, 2020, 01:45:28 AM »
This is the Debate section of the forum. If you feel like you need to insult wise, do it in Angry Ranting.
Understood, but I don't feel like I 'need' to insult anyone.  Unless pointing out poor spelling is deemed to be an 'insult' on this forum.

I do note that one of my few posts has been moved to 'angry ranting' - but that was hardly an insult!  I was merely explaining my underlying modus postandi for this forum!

I concede, however, that moderating the FES forum must be an absolute nightmare!  You must get all sorts you need to 'deal with' - and not just myself or Solarwind!  'Respect' to all of you!

4
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 04, 2020, 12:47:18 PM »
I met Patrick just once, in autumn 2011 - about a year before his death.  It was quite an experience.  By then he was too frail to show us around his 'scopes personally, but we were shown around anyway and had time to have a look at Jupiter through his planetary Newtonian.  Seeing was excellent that night, we could make out in detail the GRS on Jupiter very clearly.

I wonder if FE'ers think Jupiter too is flat, and if so how do they account for the apparent motion of the GRS?  No, don't bother!  I'm sure they've got an answer ready.

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 04, 2020, 11:40:30 AM »
You've noticed that too have you... glad I'm not the only one!  Have you also noticed how his ignore list seems to get longer and longer.  Why would you feel it necessary to ignore someone on here?
I have no idea.  But then, I'm not "Wise".  Not even with a small 'w'.  :-[

6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 04, 2020, 11:36:56 AM »
....which makes flat Earth believers hate astronomy and astronomers so much.
I can well believe that!  I suppose I must be one of the 'hated ones'.  But did you know that the late Patrick Moore was once a signed-up member of the FE society?  Of course he did it for a laugh.  I wonder what FE believers make of his legacy?

7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: May 04, 2020, 11:30:09 AM »
I don't think we'll get anywhere with trying to convince FE'ers - such as those of the "Wise" persuasion!  (I've noticed that as he gets more and more steamed up, his grammar and spelling tend to deteriorate).  At present, with lockdown etc. etc., he can't be persuaded to take a trip to the Southern Hemisphere to see for himself - but if things change for the better, perhaps he could go to somewhere south of 27ºS.  Buenos Aires or Cape Town will do, or Brisbane (just).  From that latitude southwards, Acrux (the brightest star in the Southern Cross, and the most southerly first-magnitude star) will appear circumpolar, so it can be seen on any clear night, any time of the year, and can be watched all through the night.  It never sets.

I suppose any true-believing FE'er's response will be, "It's all faked!  They've just set up a giant dome like a planetarium over our viewing locality, and the stars are being projected onto it - just like a planetarium".

I've news for FE'ers who try to put across that 'argument'.  A few years ago I indeed visited a planetarium (the one at Chichester, in the UK).  I noticed that if you're not sitting at the centre of the hall (I wasn't), some of the projected constellations will appear distorted because of foreshortening. 

But while I was in Chile and Argentina last year, I took a good look at the Southern Cross whenever it was visible.  At no time did it show the slightest distortion.  If you want to persist in a 'dome' hypothesis, explain that!

Oh well...... I'd better stop here.  The FE'ers will no doubt come up with something....

8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: how does air stay on earth
« on: April 30, 2020, 12:59:40 PM »
Maxwell's Demon could make the atmosphere behave in any way you like, including making the air stay on the 'Flat Earth' whatever.  Indeed, no need for the Ice Wall, just station an army of Demons all around the 'perimeter', each of them armed with a microscopic tennis racquet, and instruct them to knock any straying air molecule back towards the disk.

Sadly, Maxwell's Demon doesn't actually exist.  If it did, we could have an awful lot of fun with the no-longer-valid Second Law of Thermodynamics, like un-scrambling our eggs; or turning sausages back into live pigs, etc. etc..... ;D

9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Southern circumpolar stars
« on: April 30, 2020, 12:46:13 PM »
On a German equatorial mount (Skywatcher HEQ5 or NEQ6 for example), you have a latitude adjuster which allows you to set the mount for your latitude. It goes from 0 degrees to 90 degrees and works equally well in both N and S hemispheres.
Almost.  My Newtonian also has an equatorial mount with similar adjuster.  On the controller there's a switch to make the drive go in the opposite direction, for use in the southern hemisphere.  I've never taken it south of the equator, but I remember once flipping this switch by mistake.  It took me a while to figure out why my target was constantly drifting out of the FOV!  :-[
Quote
The mount also has a built in polar scope that allows you to set the mount so it aims at either the NCP or the SCP.
Mine too.  In fact I reckon that my elderly Vixen GP (still in good condition after 16 years) is more accurate than the EQ6.  In Northern hemisphere use, the polaris marker on the polar scope graticule has graduations at 5-year intervals to allow for precession.  Very helpful in avoiding drift!

Of course in the southern hemisphere this can't be used, because there is no equivalent to Polaris.

Back on topic, on my last trip to the southern hemisphere I took only a small refractor with non-driven mount, so the question of which hemisphere I was in, was immaterial.  But I did note the fact that the Sun and other celestial objects appeared to rise, set, and transit the meridian in the opposite direction to what I'm used to.

It's amusing to see how FE'ers get around that conundrum!  Of course, I know they have deeply-held beliefs about it, but........... ???

10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can a Black Hole be flat?
« on: April 27, 2020, 06:02:55 AM »
I would say most people when talking about it mean the event horizon and everything inside.
Interesting point.  What do we mean by 'inside'?

As you 'cross' (used in its loosest sense) the Event Horizon, time-like world-lines (the ones a particle - e.g. our intrepid astronaut - can move along) turn into space-like vectors (the ones a particle cannot travel along).  And vice versa.  I've never really understood this myself - but that's what the theory says!

So you might, with equal validity, talk about "the event horizon and everything after (or before) it..."

Of course I don't know if that makes any sense either.... :-\

11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can a Black Hole be flat?
« on: April 23, 2020, 12:54:13 PM »
Cleared everything up?!  A black hole is not necessarily a singularity - though there is a singularity in the metric tensor gij at the event horizon, iirc.  But it still has dimensions - although space and time get a bit confused.

Your turn!

12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can a Black Hole be flat?
« on: April 21, 2020, 11:34:09 AM »
Ask yourself first of all what causes a black hole to form. i.e. the collapse of a massive star of at least 8 solar masses. Then ask yourself whether a black hole could be flat.
True enough - thanks - but I really wanted responses from actual Flat-Earth believers - if they can come up with anything on GR that makes even a shred of sense!  I can see that you're not one of them!

I pay the occasional visit to this forum to have a bit of fun, a bit of a laugh.  Sorry, FE'ers!

13
Flat Earth Debate / Can a Black Hole be flat?
« on: April 21, 2020, 06:35:48 AM »
Just curious to know.

I've forgotten all the GR I ever read up (which wasn't much), so I can't recall whether there's a planar solution to Einstein's Field Equations analogous to Schwarzschild's solution for a spherical field.  With a corresponding flat event horizon...

I'd imagine FE'ers have researched this matter intensively.  Or have they?

Anyway, the concept of a flat Black Hole is novel.  It'd make half of the Universe utterly inaccessible...  :o

Which half are we on? :)

14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Where is Sigma Octantis if the Earth is flat?
« on: October 12, 2019, 01:46:18 PM »
Sigma Octantis is only magnitude 5.5.  That's pretty faint for naked-eye observation, and I reckon plenty of Southern hemisphere residents have never seen it - even if they know where to look!  So perhaps if there are any FE'ers south of the equator, they probably aren't that bothered anyway.

What they should be bothered about - if they go to somewhere in the Southern hemisphere but not too far from the equator (e.g. Peru) and look north, they may see the Plough but upside down, with the two 'pointers' leading to a point below the horizon.  Answer me that!  Where's Polaris?  ;)

15
hello guys and gals!

flat earth for beginners
uckfield civic centre uk
saturday 26.10.2019
FREE ENTRY!
9-5pm
audio-visual delight
all welcome!
Excellent!  Hope you have lots of fun!  Not sure yet if I can make it, although we live not far from Uckfield.  I hope you've sent an invite to Uckfield's most celebrated [ex?-] resident, Nicholas van Hoogstraten...

16
Flat Earth General / Re: Did NASA really send peopel to the moon
« on: July 20, 2019, 05:30:04 AM »
Photos of a moonscape, with the Earth in view, or of a landscape with the Moon in view, prove nothing.  It all depends on the focal length of the lens in the camera being used.  If I take a picture on Earth, with the Moon in view, through a long focus lens, the Moon will appear far larger than 'natural'.

Movie makers often exploit this phenomenon for dramatic effect.  In, for instance, 'werewolf' films...

17
Flat Earth General / Re: Why are the constellations different?
« on: July 20, 2019, 05:22:27 AM »
Also, from south of the Equator (Peru and northern Chile), I could still see the familiar Plough (Big Dipper) - but it was low down near the horizon, and upside-down (with the 'bowl' facing downwards).  One never sees it in this orientation from Europe or N America.  A tough one for FE'ers to explain, methinks!  But I'm sure you guys are game for the challenge!

18
Flat Earth General / Re: Why are the constellations different?
« on: July 19, 2019, 01:54:37 PM »
Ah - but the distance to, say, Alpha Centauri (the nearest bright star after the Sun) is about 25,000,000,000,000 miles.  The distance between, say, London and Antofagasta, is only about 6,700 miles.  Not enough to make a dent in that 25 trillion!

Oh - but I was forgetting!  You FE'ers don't believe the stars are that far away!  Presumably you think they're merely lamps hung up in the sky, a few tens of miles up....

Oh well - you can always prove your point by boarding the next available spaceship and taking a round trip to Alpha Centauri and back.  I shan't wait up, since at present spacecraft speeds it will take some 100,000 years.  You'll need to stay healthy!  ;D

19
Flat Earth General / Why are the constellations different?
« on: July 19, 2019, 05:51:06 AM »
In Chile and Argentina recently, at night I could clearly see the Southern Cross, Alpha Centauri, Carina, etc. etc.  All stuff which you never see from Europe.  How do you explain that if the Earth is flat?

20
Flat Earth General / Re: Moon landing Hoax?
« on: July 19, 2019, 05:45:46 AM »
Quote


Certainly something fishy about those two piccies.  The right hand sides look as near identical as I can make out.  But, even discounting the Earth image, look at the darker patch of moon soil, just to the left of Aldrin.  In the second picture it's almost level with his left boot.  In the first it's a good deal higher up.

So the photoshopping must have been done between Aldrin and that patch.

Hmmmm..... :-\

21
Flat Earth General / Re: Moon landing Hoax?
« on: July 17, 2019, 01:11:18 AM »
Gravity

Same force that keeps Australians from falling off the Earth.
I thought that FE'ers believe that Australia is on the same side of Earth as we are.  Just nearer the edge.  *sigh* There's so much I still have to learn about FE doctrine! .... ???

22
Flat Earth General / Moon landing Hoax?
« on: July 12, 2019, 05:44:02 AM »
Yep.  That anniversary coming up, and I guess most of you FE-ers are probably of the "Moon landings faked" persuasion.  But maybe one or two of you aren't?

If so, how do you reconcile the fact that Armstrong et al must have been walking on the underside of the Moon, heads downwards?  Otherwise they couldn't have kept in radio contact with mother Earth.  What stopped them falling off?

23
Alright, what happens when you get to that "...999999..." which comes round about the 762nd decimal place?

I'll tell you.  All these maths wizards have got it wrong, they're reading pi upside down, it should be ...666666...  And as you all know, this is the Number of the Beast, twice over, the Devil Himself has put His stamp on the number, not once but twice!

Now you understand why true FE believers eschew the number pi, and all things round or spherical associated with it.  Floreat FE!!!  Confusion to the anti-flat!

24
Flat Earth General / Exoplanets
« on: February 03, 2018, 10:03:10 AM »
As of now, over 3,700 exoplanets in other star systems are known.
This poses a few questions.
  • How many of them are flat?
  • How can we tell which ones are flat?
  • If so, can we see what's beneath them?
  • Is the Earth the only flat planet around?
  • Are there any flat planets?
Answers......

25
Flat Earth General / Banach Tarski
« on: February 09, 2016, 04:07:19 PM »
Hey guys, we have a problem...

The Earth is overpopulated as you know, we are ruining the planet.  We could do with more space.

Now, the Banach Tarski paradox, as I'm sure you know (if not - JFGI  ;)), says that you can cut a solid sphere into five pieces which can then be re-assembled to make two identical solid spheres, each as big as the original, with no gaps in their interiors.

Unbelievable, but true.

So, the Earth is sufficiently close to being spherical, surely this would work.  Get working with some diggers.  Bingo!  Double the space!

But - wait!  If you guys really believe the Earth is flat, you've a problem.  Banach-Tarski doesn't work in two dimensions.

Take it from there, folks....

26
Flat Earth General / Re: Rockets cannot work in a Vacuum.
« on: February 08, 2016, 02:47:04 AM »
You're in good company, Pop, my friend.
Back in 1920, a no less august journal than the NY Times, famously published a leading article, in which was said:
Quote
"...after the rocket quits our air and really starts on its longer journey it will neither be accelerated nor maintained by the explosion of the charges it then might have left.
That Professor GODDARD with his “chair” in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution, does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react—to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."
;D ::) ???

LOL...   And then they published a retraction.     I wonder if  the creepy little voodoo troll,  is honest enough to publish a retraction as well.
Ha ha!!!  ;D

And of course you know what date they printed their retraction?  July 17, 1969.  Which just happened, by sheer chance, to be the day after Apollo 11 mission to the Moon was launched.

I think it was some years after then, that the Vatican finally conceded that Galileo might have had it right, all along...

No - WAIT!  You guys obviously think the whole Apollo programme was faked, don't you?  And clearly you can't believe in Galileo!

More strings to your bow, Pop me ol' chap!  Keep them coming, I'm enjoying this!  :D ;)

27
Flat Earth General / Re: Rockets cannot work in a Vacuum.
« on: February 06, 2016, 04:12:49 PM »
You're in good company, Pop, my friend.
Back in 1920, a no less august journal than the NY Times, famously published a leading article, in which was said:
Quote
"...after the rocket quits our air and really starts on its longer journey it will neither be accelerated nor maintained by the explosion of the charges it then might have left.
That Professor GODDARD with his “chair” in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution, does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react—to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."
;D ::) ???

28
Flat Earth General / How deep can you drill?
« on: February 06, 2016, 01:23:58 AM »
...for oil etc., I mean?
Surely if you drill too deep you'll break right though this Flat earth of yours, won't you?  Leaving a gaping hole through the underside.  And what will happen then?  Will all the air leak out (see Larry Niven's Ringworld and sequels for accounts of this scenario)?

Is there something the oil companies aren't telling us you?

29
Flat Earth General / Aircraft puzzle
« on: June 08, 2015, 12:25:43 PM »
Hi,
I've just been having a bit of a barney with a guy on another forum.  He's puzzled as to why, if an aeroplane takes off and then keeps flying in a straight line, it doesn't shoot straight off into space.  He's also wondering why, if the (round) earth is rotating, people standing on the equator aren't all flung off by centrifugal force...

I told him to come here.  If he takes me up on this, d'you think he'll get his answers on this illustrious site? ::)

30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: time zones
« on: December 15, 2014, 11:07:17 AM »
People see two light sources or suns in the sky all the time.  The phenomenon is known as a "sun dog" or "Tatooine Sunset."  It's really just light reflected off the ice wall.
I have never seen a tattoine sunset, I've never been to Tattooine in my life.  Probably just as well, that Greedo bloke seems a nasty piece of work!

I have seen CZAs (jfgi) once, in perfect conditions, but they're purely an atmospheric effect.  Unless this speculative "ice wall" is right above your heads (watch out for falling ice cubes folks!) ..... ho ho ho!

If you really can't stomach a spheroidal earth, but you really really want to explain the Sun's different elevation at different places, you'll need an Earth other than flat.  Probably shaped like a Klein bottle or whatever (JFGI)...

Perhaps you guys should start up a new society called the Klein Bottle Earth Society or somewhat.  Good Luck!

Pages: [1] 2