1

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 06:17:35 PM »

OK, Dark force or UA does technically answer my question, but it does not seem to fit with the Zetetic priciples of analysis.

So what I can grasp so far is:

1) Gravity cannot coexist with Flat Earth Theory becuase with it comes obits, spheres and the classical understanding of the universe.

2) Accelleration is the only other thing that could explain our experiences here on Earth and as we know, no experiment can distinguish between gravity and acceleration.

On a side note, are there any threads on this forum that show photos of reproductions of some of the experiments conducted by Samuel Birley Rowbotham?  It seems they would be easy to reproduce and even easier to photograph.

2

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 05:13:09 PM »

And will someone please give YL Groper another beer before he sobers up and starts groping our sisters.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 05:08:28 PM »

It has been prevously supposed on this thread that the Earth is accellerating upwards at a rate of 32 fps/s.  At this rate we would approach the speed of light in approx. 356 days.  As we approached the speed of light, the energy required to maintain this accelleration would approach levels beyond the total of energy in the universe.  As you stated, from an outside frame of reference we are slowing as we approach the speed of light, but the amount of energy required to get us to this point cannot be dismissed as irrelevent and must have a source.

The energy required to accellerate an object must act on the mass of the object as measured from a stationary reference.  It's just like the fact that you cannot lift youself up by pulling on your own hair.

Also, as the Earth increases in speed and thus mass, the amount of energy required to maintain an accelleration of 32 fps/s is constantly increasing.

This energy must come from somewhere.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 04:39:41 PM »

OK, mass is relative, but there still needs to be an explaination for the near infinite amount of energy required to maintain the accelleration of the Earth at near light speed.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 04:15:36 PM »

You are correct.  It is impossible for anything with mass to travel the speed of light because at the speed of light the mass of the object would be infinite and therefore would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate it futher.  Likewise as you approach the speed of light your mass approaches infinity. So being that at the accelleration of gravity the Earth and everything on it would approach the speed of light in about 356 days, all mass on Earth would be near infinite and thus changing the momentum of anything on Earth would take near infinite energy, which I'm pretty sure my muscles are not capable of producing.

So simply waving your arm in the air negates the possiblilty that we are approaching the speed of light, unless that is you are willing to accept that humans are capable of producing near infinite energy.

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth

« on: February 16, 2007, 04:07:39 PM »

I was in a discussion with Tom Bishop on a thread called "new" however I was on to something so the admin locked the thread.  Here's the rundown of the discussion:

LucidObscurity:

based on an accelleration of 32 feet per second per second, with the speed of light being approx. 186,282.397 miles per second (983,571,056.16 fps) the speed of light would be reached in approx. 356 days.

983,571,056.16 / 32 = 30,736,595.505

convert to minutes:

30,736,595.505 / 60 = 512,276.59175

convert to hours:

512,276.59175 / 60 = 8,537.9431958333333333333333333333

convert to days:

8,537.9431958333333333333333333333 / 24 = 355.74763315972222222222222222222

So if we are accellerating at 32 fps/s then we have long exceeded the universal speed limit.

LucidObscurity:

Oh, and BTW, once we reached the speed of light, we would be frozen in time since travelling through the first 3 dimensions at the speed of light means you are at a standstill in the 4th dimension.

Tom Bishop:

Uh, ever hear of Relativity? The earth would continue to approach the speed of light, without reaching it.

LucidObscurity:

So you're saying this flat Earth we live on has near infinite mass as well do all its inhabitants whom are moving at the same speed.

Tom Bishop:

Yes, and we're all gaining mass every moment of the day.

Don't you ever wonder why women always think they're getting fatter?

LucidObscurity: (this is what i would have posted if not for the thread being locked)

So being that it takes near infinite energy to modify the momentum of or otherwise move an object of near infinite mass then how is that I can stand up, walk or toss my buddy “YL Groper” another beer?

7

Flat Earth Q&A / new

« on: February 16, 2007, 03:04:00 PM »

So you're saying this flat Earth we live on has near infinite mass as well do all its inhabitants whom are moving at the same speed.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / new

« on: February 16, 2007, 02:42:20 PM »

Oh, and BTW, once we reached the speed of light, we would be frozen in time since travelling through the first 3 dimensions at the speed of light means you are at a standstill in the 4th dimension.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / new

« on: February 16, 2007, 02:32:20 PM »

based on an accelleration of 32 feet per second per second, with the speed of light being approx. 186,282.397 miles per second (983,571,056.16 fps) the speed of light would be reached in approx. 356 days.

983,571,056.16 / 32 = 30,736,595.505

convert to minutes:

30,736,595.505 / 60 = 512,276.59175

convert to hours:

512,276.59175 / 60 = 8,537.9431958333333333333333333333

convert to days:

8,537.9431958333333333333333333333 / 24 = 355.74763315972222222222222222222

So if we are accellerating at 32 fps/s then we have long exceeded the universal speed limit.