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 - themagicker

Pages: [1]
Flat Earth Debate / A Simple Experiment
« on: June 25, 2019, 11:23:55 AM »
Hello everyone,

I have seen quite a lot of whimsical 'science' on this website (for example, on the FAQ one piece of evidence brought up is the Bedford Level experiment and the works of Samuel Rowbotham ... except only Samuel Rowbotham's initial attempt concluded the Earth was flat, and later attempts that took atmospheric refraction into account failed to reproduce that conclusion, and bear in mind that Samuel Rowbotham dropped out of school at the age of 9). So I am going to propose that everyone (flat-earthers and round-earthers alike) to attempt to carry out this experiment to determine the curvature of the Earth (a flat plane has a curvature of 0).

Sample Hypothesis: I predict that the Earth is flat.

Initial Observations:
  • The sun appears to orbit over the Earth along the East-West axis.
  • When the sun is overhead in the sky, the surrounding area is brighter.
  • When the sun cannot be seen in the sky, the sky is much darker.
  • Water falls.
  • Light sources will distribute light in all directions equally except when a physical object is in the path of the light, at which point, a shadow is cast, where the light cannot get to.
  • Light dissipates and scatters (example: a flashlight turned on at night is not visible from an infinite distance away).
  • The longer the sun is overhead, the hotter it tends to be outside.
  • The arctic and antarctic regions are known as being some of the coldest places on the planet.
  • The region of the USA on a 2D projection of the World is approximately on the quarter-way point between the arctic region and the equator.

Based on the observations above, the following conclusions may be drawn:
  • Because the sky is brighter if and only if the sun is in the sky, then the sun is the source of light.
  • Because light sources distribute light in all directions, and because there exists times where the sun is not visible from the sky, then the sun must move closer and farther away from points on the Earth.
  • If the Earth is flat, and since the Sun is a light source that appears to orbit the Earth overhead, then either the edges of the Earth and the midpoint will receive less light than the rest of the planet (or possibly both).
  • Because of the presence of the arctic and antarctic regions, it is reasonable to assume that the midpoint and the edge of the Earth both lie on those regions, because they are some of the coldest regions on the planet.
  • If the Earth is flat, then the closer an area is to either Antarctica or the arctic region, the shorter their days will be.
  • If the equator receives 12 hours of daylight, and 12 hours of night, then halfway between the equator and one of the arctic regions daytime will be about half as long, resulting in 6 hours of daylight, and 18 hours of night.
  • If the halfway point between the arctic regions and the equator receives about 6 hours of sunlight and the equator receives 12, then the quarter-way point between the equator and the arctic regions will receive about 9 hours of sunlight.

  • Measure the length of daylight time at various points in America.
  • Measure the length of daylight time at some country on the equator, (I recommend Ecuador, both because it is close to the equator, but it also sounds a bit like 'equator').
  • Let A be the time in hours measured from step 1 in the experiment, and B be the time in hours from step 2 in the experiment. Let C = B/A . If C > 1.33, the Earth is flat, otherwise, it has positive curvature (if C is really big, then the Earth actually has negative curvature, but that would mean that would imply that the Earth is a bowl or an inside out sphere, which would result in either A: the midpoint of the Earth is drowned in water and the rims are akin to deserts or B: there would exist points on the Earth where one could view the entirety of the the world with the exceptions of the limit of range the eye can perceive, and the limit of areas blocked off from view by obstacles).

The Earth is flat. / The Earth is not flat.


I hope to see your results soon.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Disproving the gravity in 30 seconds
« on: June 24, 2019, 04:35:43 PM »
Dear Sir or Madam,

I have a series of grievances that require addressing:

"All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?"

"Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3 water has 1t/m^3 too."

The figures presented above are both approximations, water and people have densities that differ by about 12 kg/m^3, but by using tonnes you lose that accuracy.

"Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance."

Humans typically float to the top of water because we are less dense than water, but again, the approximation of densities is what causes this logical fallacy.

"So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero."

The phrase you are looking for is net force, and yes this part in theory is correct in accordance with Newton's third law; however, the correct situation is where the human body is pulled down by gravity, but pushed up by the buoyant force of the water, and since the person is less dense than water, the volume of water they displace is equal to their weight, but less than their total volume. Thus, they float.

"if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down."

Again, this does not work because humans are buoyant; however, if you try the same thing with something like a bowling ball (which is denser than water), then you will notice the effects of gravity as the bowling ball sinks to the bottom.

"If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course."

This sentence is just too full of grammatical errors for me to understand.

Thank you for your time.

Pages: [1]