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 - alex314

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
Flat Earth General / Re: Sun and moon size and probability
« on: September 23, 2019, 12:42:57 AM »
They are not the same size, just close.

The possiblity of their being close size is same with being same size  in a 3d infinite space; zero.

As we can observe the moon and the sun to have a similar angular size, it is evident that the possibility for such a thing to happen is clearly larger than zero.

2
Flat Earth General / Re: What convinced you to become a flat earther
« on: September 23, 2019, 12:39:41 AM »
Not many even here seem to like to say they are. It is a bit surprising as there have been many calculations which show the number of FE followers/believers to be tens of millions.

I am guessing it is just because they are shy, and have no need to pledge their allegiance.

tens of millions? I highly doubt that! I estimate like 99% of people in flat-earth forums to be either normal people (i.e. not believing in the flat earth nonsense, like myself), sarcastic people or trolls. There are not a lot of flat-earth believers around the globe!

And shy? I experienced them shouting and insulting in other forums and on facebook - but maybe those were the many trolls there are.

In any way: My question has not been answered so far - nobody is convinced the earth is flat.

3
Flat Earth General / Re: What convinced you to become a flat earther
« on: September 22, 2019, 09:21:05 PM »
So - there are no flat earthers?

4
Flat Earth General / Re: Lunar eclipses
« on: September 18, 2019, 01:05:39 AM »
I'll start a new theory.

The moon is a luminaire but gets shut down for maintenance every so often.

That is an even better idea than the flat-earth nonsense!

5
Flat Earth General / Re: Lunar eclipses
« on: September 17, 2019, 10:04:43 PM »
Flat earthers: You have nothing to say on this topic? Maybe its inconvenient for you? No verifiable alternative explanation?


Ooooohhhhh.....

6
Flat Earth General / Re: Lunar eclipses
« on: September 16, 2019, 09:39:54 PM »
There are some explanations in the Tfes wiki about the so called Shadow Object:

https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Lunar_Eclipse

Quote
A Lunar Eclipse occurs about twice a year when a satellite of the sun passes between the sun and moon.

This satellite is called the Shadow Object or Antimoon. Its orbital plane is tilted at an angle to the sun's orbital plane, making eclipses possible only when the three bodies (Sun, Object, and Moon) are aligned.

Of course this shadow object has never been seen or detected outside of lunar eclipses, it just happens to be there when needed.

This explanation seems to be at odds with another common FE belief, that the moon has its own light.
From that description in the Wiki, I picture the geometry of the Sun,  shadow object and Moon like this:



That would make any shadow on the Moon seem impossible but, so far, no one has suggested any changes apart from the sizes of the Sun and Moon being exaggerated to make the visible.

So, as I understand, there is no logical explanation for a flat earth lunar eclipse. Am I correct?

7
Flat Earth General / Lunar eclipses
« on: September 16, 2019, 04:17:05 AM »
What is the flat earth explanation for a lunar eclipse?

A shadow moon which shadows only the moon but not stars  (or anything else) ;D?

8
Would love to go to such an event, but it is too far away.

I would love the opportunity to talk to a flat earther directly, as he/she cannot run away anymore!

9
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 13, 2019, 07:17:47 AM »
Given the absolute fact that all of the RE here do not know what causes terrestrial gravity, and have no answer for it, the percentage should have been much higher than 25%.

Gravity is caused by mass.


10
Flat Earth General / What convinced you to become a flat earther
« on: September 13, 2019, 03:48:16 AM »
I am not a flat earther, but I would like to know - from a flat earther - what 'convinced' you that the earth is flat.

- Because of one specific observation you have made?
- Because of one specific YT video you have watched?
- Because of some person telling you?
- Because of several reasons; which reasons?



11
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 12, 2019, 03:43:51 AM »
The black sun is invisible, only  NASA knows where it is... and well, timeanddate.com must also know, since they also calculate eclipse paths.

Yes that is funny.

But still far away from my original question about Jupiter and his moons...

12
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 08, 2019, 10:28:46 PM »
If scientists could draw a free body diagram of the change in angular momentum of a south bound plane travelling from far in the north to the equator, and then measure to test against hypothesis, would, and how so, would this prove the sperical nature of the earth.

Of course.

But given the very small change over a flight duration of many hours, and a lot of external disturbances during the flight (wind, clouds, airstreams etc). these disturbances are most likely much larger than what you are about to measure. I would say it is a very impractical way to measure earth's rotation.

13
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 08, 2019, 09:24:00 PM »
Shifter, if you have any evidence whatsoever of additional spatial dimensions, the rest of humanity would love to know.  We've been searching for evidence for a long time and so far have not found anything.

Or at least just let me know.  Please.  You have no idea how disappointed I was from the result of Limits on the number of spacetime dimensions from GW170817.

I should follow the results of gravitational waves observations more closely. I was working in that area previously  ;D

14
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 06, 2019, 02:35:56 AM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!
If meat's bad for you, then how come it's food?

I cannot answer that question appropriately, as I am no expert in food question (as stated above: I am an expert regarding shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics, not biology or medicine).

15
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 06, 2019, 01:55:26 AM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!

You know and I know that the universe is made up of more than 3 spatial dimensions.

I do not know that.

Then you dont know half as much as you pretend to know. Heard of Brane?

Please ask your question.

I did, you stated you didn't know so I gave you something you could study and get back to me.

"The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics. "

Higher dimensions are real and I was asking the question which fits perfectly in your terms of reference.

I am not aware of any higher dimensions. Therefore I cannot answer any questions related to higher dimensions. Simple.

If your answers are confined only to an Earth in 3 dimensions, all your answers will be incomplete or flat out incorrect.

All I can say that I do not know of any existance of more than 3 spatial dimensions. Therefore i cannot answer your question! Maybe there are more than 3 spatial dimensions, maybe not.


Any other question?

16
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 06, 2019, 12:11:54 AM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!

You know and I know that the universe is made up of more than 3 spatial dimensions.

I do not know that.

Then you dont know half as much as you pretend to know. Heard of Brane?

Please ask your question.

I did, you stated you didn't know so I gave you something you could study and get back to me.

"The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics. "

Higher dimensions are real and I was asking the question which fits perfectly in your terms of reference.

I am not aware of any higher dimensions. Therefore I cannot answer any questions related to higher dimensions. Simple.

17
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 06, 2019, 12:04:34 AM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!

You know and I know that the universe is made up of more than 3 spatial dimensions.

I do not know that.

Then you dont know half as much as you pretend to know. Heard of Brane?

Please ask your question.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lack of flat earth images
« on: September 06, 2019, 12:00:00 AM »
There are billions of pictures of the earth.

But there is exactly ZERO pictures taken of a flat eart from more than 100 km above the ground.

Explanation: Earth is not flat...

Here is one



http://projectsmartspacescience.sr.unh.edu/teachers_smpage.shtml

You can go pretty high, but dont expect to see the entire Earth at once. Also, not all the Earth is in sunlight at the same time so the rest gets very dark to see
How about a bit wider angle?

At what altitude do you see the curvature of the Earth? - Quora.
The explanation in there is worth reading.

Still looks pretty flat there. Why does it need to be a perfect 2D line? Whats wrong with a convex?

Yes it looks flat. It looks 'flat' all around me.

But that does not prove the earth is flat. Maybe I am too close!

Also, I do not see radio waves, for example. But they do exist! (Just as an example of something cannot see, but it still exists).

19
Flat Earth General / Re: Question about sphere earth
« on: September 05, 2019, 11:43:17 PM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!

You know and I know that the universe is made up of more than 3 spatial dimensions.

I do not know that.

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lack of flat earth images
« on: September 05, 2019, 10:57:55 PM »
There are billions of pictures of the earth.

But there is exactly ZERO pictures taken of a flat eart from more than 100 km above the ground.

Explanation: Earth is not flat...

Here is one



http://projectsmartspacescience.sr.unh.edu/teachers_smpage.shtml


So you say that this image shows 'flat earth'? How can you be sure that this is not a zoom into some sphere earth image?

Well I gave you the web site of the people who arranged the photo. It is what it is. I dont see why they would feel the need to zoom in on the Earth. I would imagine they would be after as wide of a field as possible

But te website does not mention details for the photo, like the field-of-view, and the height above ground it was taken at. So without this information it is impossible to say if this is really flat (which you can never do), or just a tin piece of a sphere.

Do you find this information?

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lack of flat earth images
« on: September 05, 2019, 10:43:44 PM »
There are billions of pictures of the earth.

But there is exactly ZERO pictures taken of a flat eart from more than 100 km above the ground.

Explanation: Earth is not flat...

Here is one



http://projectsmartspacescience.sr.unh.edu/teachers_smpage.shtml


So you say that this image shows 'flat earth'? How can you be sure that this is not a zoom into some sphere earth image?

22
Flat Earth General / Question about sphere earth
« on: September 05, 2019, 10:12:26 PM »
Hello flat earthers,

I am an expert in the sphere earth (like about 7 other billion people), and I would be HAPPY to answer any question you have about the sphere earth model / observations / experiments etc. The question must be related to the shape of earth, physics, astronomy or mathematics.

I will answer in a clear and direct manner (and not like flat earthers in a evading, insulting and confusing answer).

Please ask!

23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lack of flat earth images
« on: September 05, 2019, 10:09:59 PM »
There are billions of pictures of the earth.

But there is exactly ZERO pictures taken of a flat eart from more than 100 km above the ground.

Explanation: Earth is not flat...

24
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: "Flat Earth Believers Debate" Subforum
« on: September 04, 2019, 12:39:50 AM »
We need an extra subforum in this category. The people in the believers' forum generally treat each other with respect. there is no discussion here. but when we come to the discussion forum, we cannot discuss the issues we want to discuss with ourselves because of the globularists.

In what sense can't you discuss issues because of 'globularists'? What are they doing? Showing where you are incorrect?

25
Flat Earth General / Re: What are the best flat earth arguments?
« on: September 03, 2019, 11:30:48 PM »
FE has no real arguments From what I have seen, FE spend most of their time trying to find issues with RE and looking at NASA videos, rather than defending thier own model.

I have never seen a complete flat-earth model, describing how it all works. Not even a tiny part of such a 'model'.

26
Flat Earth General / Re: What are the best flat earth arguments?
« on: September 03, 2019, 10:04:50 PM »
Could you summarize or point me to the best few arguments? I'm looking for just a couple of arguments that will give someone pause, to make them realize that they haven't thought this through.

Thanks.

Thought about it, but I have non serious argument in favor of a flat earth. Asking for them also all the time - no response of something that makes sense!

27
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 03, 2019, 04:36:21 AM »
The Sun does have a solid surface, multiple proofs available:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2075989#msg2075989

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2090897#msg2090897

You simply haven't done your homework on the subject.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

The proof is very direct, using Clayton's equation which is very accurate, as the graphs show.

Here is the official pressure of the chromosphere of the Sun:



PRESSURE: 10-13 BAR = 0.0000000000001 BAR

The entire chromosphere will then be subjected to the full centrifugal force of rotation, as will the photosphere itself of course.

Completely unexplained by modern science.

Since the gases are under a very low gravitational pressure, the centrifugal force of rotation must have formed quite a flat sun.

NO further recourse can be made for gravity.

Gravity has already balanced out as much as was possible of the gaseous pressure, and still we are left with A VERY LOW PRESSURE.

Solar gravity has balanced out the thermal pressure.

At this point in time the sun will turn into A HUGE GAS CENTRIFUGE WITH NO OUTER CASING, running at some 1,900 m/s.

That is, the solar gases in the photosphere and cromosphere are just standing there, with no explanation by modern science whatsoever.

As if this wasn't enough, we have the huge centrifugal force factor that is exerted each and every second on the photosphere and the cromosphere.

The centrifugal force would cause the sun to collapse into a disk in no time at all.


Go ahead and plug the numbers in the Clayton equation.

Here are the final results:

ac/g = 0.0063/0.0000507 = 124.26


Therefore, you haven't the foggiest idea of what you are talking about.


Do you have any evidence that "this jet" does not "have any effect" at all.

The proof is in the orbit itself.

ANY disturbance of this orbital stability would lead to chaos, even by some mere meters.

If the mass of the "jet of water vapor and ice particles" is very much less than the mass of Enceladus there will be negligible effect on the motion of Enceladus.

ANY negligible effect would lead to orbital instability.

The exhaust is distributed over a huge area, encompassing at least a single hemisphere.

And no, the water vapor does not fall back on Enceladus, it is being ejected into the vacuum of space.


The post was about Jupiter, not about the components of the sun.

28
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 03, 2019, 02:52:58 AM »
Gravitons are string theory, not the currently excepted theory.

Yes - no gravitons required to explain the motions in the solar system.

That is irrelevant to my original question.


Please explain how gravity operates without a force carrier.

That is irrelevant to my original question. Gravity can explain the orbits of planets and moons.

What gravity really is, what the force carrier is -  that is an entire different question.

29
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 03, 2019, 12:06:55 AM »
Gravitons are string theory, not the currently excepted theory.

Yes - no gravitons required to explain the motions in the solar system.

30
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 03, 2019, 12:02:27 AM »
All planets/stars have a discoidal shape (including Jupiter and its satellites).

As an example, here is the proof for the Sun:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1939765#msg1939765

However, modern astrophysics cannot explain the current orbit of Jupiter.

Here is the FLUX OF GRAVITONS PARADOX:

How a three body system cannot function given the attractive gravity scenario - for a better visualization, use Sun - Jupiter - Io

"OBJECTIVE: Demonstrate that this interchange of gravitational particles again will seem to result in violations of conservation of energy. We will do this by demonstrating that, if matter is indeed influenced by gravitational particles, then, even under normal orbital conditions, gravity should decrease, due to a gravitational shadowing effect. This shadowing effect would violate conservation of energy.

Thought Experiment: IMAGINE THAT GRAVITONS BEHAVE LIKE PHOTONS

(for descriptive purposes only)

To better visualize how this partial gravitational influence might be encountered, let us describe gravity and gravitational interaction in terms of light, so that:

If gravitons exist, violations of the Law of Conservation of Energy will almost certainly occur.

Brilliance of light = gravitational attraction = (emission of gravitons)

Decreasing Transparency = Increasing Density and Mass

In this thought experiment, we will specify one sun, one earth and one moon. Each will be partially luminous, to simulate their 'output' of gravitons, and each will also be partially opaque, to indicate their 'capturing-of' or their 'reception-of' gravitons. We would then have the following description of the system.

In this imaginary system, the moon orbits the earth, and the earth-moon pair orbits the sun. Since glow will simulate gravity emitted, we could describe this sun as glowing brighter that this earth, and this earth as glowing brighter than the moon.

In addition, the moon would be more transparent than the earth, and the earth would be less transparent than the sun. This would simulate the increasing 'interception' of gravity, with an increase of both the density and mass from the moon, to the earth then to the sun in our imaginary example.

In this example, the light from the sun would 'attract' the earth and the moon (simulating the pull of gravity). The earth would glow less brilliantly than the sun, but still brighter than the moon. The moon would be attracted to both the earth and the sun, but would orbit the earth. The earth moon pair would then orbit the sun together.

In this example, the moon would spend more time in the earth's shadow, and the earth's shadow would be comparatively darker than the moon's shadow. Since the moon would be attracted to the sun only by the light from the sun, and the light emitted by the earth with the sun shining through the less transparent earth would be less than the light emitted by the sun directly, the moon would gain some amount of orbital distance from the sun every time the moon 'hid' in the earth's shadow.

This gain of gravitational energy, simulated in this example with light and transparency, {for visual purposes only}, would violate conservation of energy. If gravitons exist, they must self-condradictingly pass through nearer masses unaffected, so as not to decrease gravity for masses at a further distance, while still interacting with those closer masses at the same time.

Otherwise, we are left with the choice that masses at a distance will randomly gain some gravitational potential energy depending on whether randomly distributed nearer masses create a gravitational 'shadow' effect. We are once again led to the conclusion that gravitons, if they exist, must create violations of conservation of energy. This is hardly a reliable theoretical endorsement of gravitons, when conservation of energy must fall by the wayside in order to allow gravitons to exist. A much more logical conclusion is again, gravitons do not exist, and cannot exist. Some other method of explaining gravitational interactions must be needed."

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2002552#msg2002552

Plasma Flux Transfer Events between Saturn and the Sun


On a different but related subject, if gas had an effect on objects in a vacuum we would expect to find an example in nature.

"Saturn's moon Enceladus, for example, shoots a jet of water ice 500 KM into space. The diameter of the moon itself is only 500 KM. Does this jet have any effect? No. The jet as tall as the moon is wide goes harmlessly off into space."

https://www.space.com/22181-saturn-moon-enceladus-water-geysers.html

https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/science/enceladus/





What are you talking about? This looks like a mashup of physical terms, not making any sense. I appreciate if you can explain slowly of what you mean.

What have 'gravitons' to do with it?

Also, of course the orbit can be explained by gravity alone. I have done a simulation myself!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6