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 - Josef

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
61
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A proposed experiment for testing bending light.
« on: August 25, 2008, 06:01:17 AM »
Stringing up a wire between two trees sounds like a crazy idea..
Why not do an easier version? (still very hard to do though, for a hobby scientist)
Set up two mirrors, exactly 90 degrees to a FLAT horizontal plane. Bounce a laser between the mirrors. Have photo-sensors count the bounces to get the total distance. See if the laser wanders upwards/downwards, and use that to rate to the distance. You get the idea..

I personally like the idea, but I don't have that kind of fluid cash to be throwing away on a hobby exercise, and it's been done anyways many times for multiple non-related experiments with no noticeable vertical wandering. I'm sure FE proponents would say that striking the vertical plane re-aligned it straight again, it's all a big conspiracy, or something like that. That's why I picked the simplest kind of experiment for my proposal. Emitter -> target... All I'm concerned with is getting pre-experiment deviation to an acceptable level

I dont think they would say that about the mirrors.. Its too easy to see how a mirror works. Just look in one.

The tree idea is not the simplest one. Its obviously to sensitive to errors. Keep in mind that the bent light in FE is exactly the same as how much earth is curved in RE.

62
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 25, 2008, 05:31:04 AM »
Robosteve seems to be an RE'er who has put his blind faith into the RE model. He has not looked into the facts or looked into the data for his claim of "accuracy." Any claim of accuracy must first be proven.

Im really confused. Why is Robosteve a mod then? Who owns this forum? Where is the power, whos in charge?

63
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A proposed experiment for testing bending light.
« on: August 24, 2008, 01:24:29 PM »
Stringing up a wire between to trees sounds like a crazy idea..

Why dont do a easier version? (still very hard to do though, for a hobby scientist)

Set up two mirrors, exactly 90 degrees to a FLAT horizontal plane. Bounce a laser between the mirrors. Have photosensors count the bounces to get the total distance. Se if the laser wanders upwards/downwards, and by witch rate to the distance. You get the idea..

64
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 24, 2008, 08:42:09 AM »
As far as observable effects are concerned, RET makes damn good predictions. I am trying to reconcile FET with these observations in the simplest way possible.

Hey, youre not like many of the other FE'ers! And I mean that in a good way..
What does the FES say about this?

And, isnt there an even simpler way to reconcile FET to RET predictions? The simplest way must be to aknowledge the theory to be a theoretic mindgame, not connected to 'reality'. Or just abandon the theory all together (explanation to FET: RE), but that wouldnt be reconciling.

65
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Newton's Laws and FET
« on: August 22, 2008, 08:18:14 AM »
What really bugs me about the bendy light model is that all the light rays emanating from the sun are pointed straight down. Apparently nothing is being irradiated to the side, or if it is, I would love to see a bendy light picture that shows what happens to these slightly glancing rays.

If we call straight down 90 degrees... then what happens to a ray of light that emanates at 89 degrees? I have a suspicion that such a ray of light doesn't even intersect the earth. But FE is not my theory. Can an FEer provide a picture?

What? Dont you see the 3D images in this thread?

66
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Newton's Laws and FET
« on: August 21, 2008, 01:53:34 PM »
I liked those 3D renditions.. A lot because of the turtles. :)
Ive used the illustration of the bendy light to add my thoughts on how to measure if, and how much (?), light is bent.. Hope you dont mind?
From person A:s point of view, the sun looks like its at pos 1. From B it looks like sun is at pos 2.
Measuring angles between the line of sight to the apparent sun, and the FE, plus distances to the other person -> Both the height and distance between the visual sun(s) could be measured this way? And also where the sun really are.
This is just something I came to think about in a hurry, its probably completly wrong.. hehe.




67
From wikipedia: "The terms gravitation and gravity are mostly interchangeable in everyday use, but in scientific usage a distinction may be made."

Lets all stop pretending to be scientists? Please.

68
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sun's orbit around FE
« on: August 20, 2008, 01:03:19 PM »
The sun orbits around a barycentre. Its sort of a balance between all the bodies out there. And its very lucky that the barycentre is right above the north pole..

As its lucky that earth isnt tilted in any way when pushed.

Its very well balanced and thought out. Humbling, makes one believe in a creator?

69
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 19, 2008, 01:34:25 PM »
If anything, the result is even worse then than it is in this thread for the FE'rs.

It might look dark right now. But theyll come back.. Theyll come back..

70
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctica Cup International Yacht Race
« on: August 19, 2008, 01:28:27 PM »
That's the trouble with Zetetics.  No evidence is required to back up any claims.

Nah.. I think you got it wrong. Zetetics are sceptics right? That would make them allways asking for evidence.. ?

71
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 19, 2008, 01:24:00 PM »
So whats the point of calling it falling?

In my language:
Yes = a dishwashin soap
I = in
my = A name
are = Another name
is = ice
fall = case or rope to set sail with or to fall
not = note
dog = died

72
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Striking another bow against FE
« on: August 19, 2008, 01:09:01 PM »
 I skipped through thread and, Robosteve, there are things like libraries and universities out there. If you want some education and proofs then go out and read books, study, go some good labs and do experiments etc. There aren't any hard scientists here who can give all calculations and stuff on plate for you. And even if there were the mathematics and physic formulas can get quite difficult so that anyone here wouldn't understand these. My point is, there is thousands of proofs that earth is round out there, just go out and take a look, don't wait that others take them for you. But for your side of view. How many proofs there are that earth is flat? There is one book and some non scientist people who just visually observe things and speculate about results of their so called experiments. How do you expect to get some smart people in your rows when you don't have anything to show to back up your beliefs...

He doesnt want to go out of FE...

73
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 19, 2008, 06:57:17 AM »
Tom Bishops new theory:  Anyone who has seen the sunrise and set is in on the conspiracy. 

All we need to do to show it is accurate is for all forumers to post thier locations and thier current sunrise/set times, there must be load from Europe, Austrailia and North America, anyone from Africa or South America? 

I expect bishop will deny the existence of South America and Africa next.  How many people on those continents?  Bishop is going to add them to the conspiracy list. 

I know its accurate. Ive been using sunrise/sunset tables several times when sailing. Its very useful to know when its getting light and dark..

Btw I live in Gothenburg Sweden..

74
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctica Cup International Yacht Race
« on: August 19, 2008, 06:46:03 AM »
This is interesting to me as well. While a lot of FE'ers believe that all the airlines are in on the conspiracy, they seem to forget that there are millions of navel vessels that use similar routes, and you'd have to assume they are all in on it too. If you tried to tell a seasoned south Atlantic sailor that it's 13,000 miles from the bottom tip of South America to the bottom tip of South Africa, they'd laugh in your face, especially if you told them you'd hit the side of South America on that route.


Your FE map isnt correct..

Besides that. Whats the biggest motivator on planet? Money.
What makes all those companies that operates on a free market to take a longer path to the destination?
If theyre all paid, the NASA budget is eaten pretty fast Id say.
If theyre fooled, someone should eventually raise an eyebrow on why the distances doesnt fit.

75
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Acceleration causes gravitational effect?
« on: August 19, 2008, 06:24:20 AM »
Many of you guys know a lot more about these things than I do, thats why Im asking..

Is the Earth causing massive timespace warp or not?

Yes
Traveling at relativistic speeds for the age of the Earth, it's probably that the universe outside our frame of reference has experienced heat death. Time dilation.

Cool..

76
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Acceleration causes gravitational effect?
« on: August 19, 2008, 06:23:46 AM »
you are the guys that think that the world it flat.  I mean really, you honestly think this.

Naah. I think most FE'ers just choose to stay in that universe, to explore it and have fun..

77
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 19, 2008, 03:35:06 AM »
I think its interresting that at winter, on FE, the sun is covering much more of earth then at summer. How much more? Double?

I wonder what effect that change in total sun coverage has on the global temperature..

I dont think FE can be very succesful explaining these graphics. If Id be FEer, I would try to disprove the whole thing. Like Tom "you havent made all the observations youre self so you cant prove its true"..

78
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctica Cup International Yacht Race
« on: August 19, 2008, 03:21:00 AM »
You are basically arguing with Tom Bishop.. There is no win, on either side.

79
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 17, 2008, 03:08:48 PM »
But in RE the earth is not accelerating. Have I missed something?
Sometimes it is.  The transfer between apogee and perigee around the sun.  Between perigee and apogee is should be decelerating.

Yes, but its not accelerating up. Up in RE is outwards.

80
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My understanding of "time"
« on: August 17, 2008, 03:04:50 PM »
Plus, all mass in the universe is accelerating.. So it cant be observed from the "outside". So, it doesnt matter.

81
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:59:47 PM »
Thats my point. You cant say "No. Skydivers arent accelerating". Cause it depends. Both views are correct.

Well, not really. Velocity is relative, acceleration isn't. It is technically incorrect to measure acceleration from a non-inertial (that is, accelerating) frame of reference. So to measure acceleration correctly, you would have to be in freefall, observing the accelerating object.

But in RE the earth is not accelerating. Have I missed something?

82
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:53:09 PM »
Here. I locked it temporarily because people were trolling it.

*reading*
You should edit it.. Says "second UA" at first. Dont think people read all those posts to see if you changed it later on.
And, illustrations is allways nice.

Another thing. Could your theory work with anything else than FE? If not, one way to falsify your theory is to show that earth is fex round?

83
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:34:19 PM »
What if someone (FE'er maybe is motivated) constructs a FE map from those daylight projections?
Ie reverse engineering, making the map fit the sunlight, instead of doing the other way around as this thread author did?

I've thought about that. I don't know exactly how it would fit, though.

And if the sunlight shapes are correct in the first place.. :/

84
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:33:17 PM »
I know, but the point of view is different. It all depends where you are, and how you THINK you are moving..

That is essentially the underlying principle behind relativity. The point is that we feel the upwards acceleration, except that we misinterpret it as a downwards pull.

Thats my point. You cant say "No. Skydivers arent accelerating". Cause it depends. Both views are correct.

85
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth map
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:29:58 PM »
This thread is only about proving that Earth is round. Boring..

86
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:21:05 PM »
One of the strange consequences of relativity is that you are accelerating up, falling objects are not accelerating down.

Damn. Im thinking RE all the time. Its very hard to get into the FE mindset, but Ill get there.

This holds true in RET too. It's difficult to understand, but so are a lot of Einstein's ideas.

I know, but the point of view is different. It all depends where you are, and how you THINK you are moving..

87
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:18:30 PM »
What if someone (FE'er maybe is motivated) constructs a FE map from those daylight projections?
Ie reverse engineering, making the map fit the sunlight, instead of doing the other way around as this thread author did?

88
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunlight on a flat earth
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:16:34 PM »
I bet it wouldnt look that silly on a correct FE map..
I correct FE map doesn't exist.

So? The daylight projection looks silly on these images because its a RE map thats been flattened out to look like a flat earth. It doesnt prove or disprove anything.

89
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:14:37 PM »
I haven't finalised the mathematics behind it yet. Once I have, then I shall be able to answer that.

Do you have a thread for your theory? Ive gone through the first 7 pages and I dont know what to search for..

90
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sinking Ship experiment Results
« on: August 17, 2008, 02:03:41 PM »
His theory failed, he needs to come up with a whole new one. 

No. Also, I didn't remember posting that, but apparently I did have a different vision when I first conceived the EA. It is unimportant; the effect is the same.

Now. How can your theory be tested? Or even better, falsified?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8