31

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Triplet (or more) paradox vs Twin paradox

« on: February 07, 2018, 06:53:41 PM »

Let there is a triplet of A, B, and C on an asteroid initially. A stays on an asteroid while B and C set out for a long space journey with high speed (say 0.5c and 0.9c) at the same time in the same direction relative to A. Assume each 10 years old at the time of departure. B and C are gone for 60 years relative to A. Afterward, B and C return home at the same time and reunited with A on an asteroid.

What would be the age of A relative to B and C?
What would be the age of B relative to C and A?
What would be the age of C relative to A and B?

For person c, relative to a they are gone for 60 years
This works out to be a time dilation factor of 2.29
So for person c only 60/2.29 years have passed ~ 26 years

Person b has a time dilation factor of 1.15
so 60 / 1.15 ~ 51 years has passed

Person A is 70,
Person B is 61,
Person C is 36

See here and here
http://www.emc2-explained.info/Dilation-Calc/#.Wnu7TZP1V24
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/tdil.html

32

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The Stars...

« on: February 07, 2018, 05:41:04 PM »

While you may witness the full circular rotation around the North Pole from any and all meridian point north of the Equator, you will never witness the full circular rotation from any and all meridian points south of the Equator.

At least that is my understanding.

I have photos of the full circular rotation from New Zealand if you would like to see them

33

Flat Earth General / Re: Orbital Mechanics

« on: February 07, 2018, 02:43:23 PM »

JRoweSkeptic is a troll shill, you are never going to get a response out of him that actually makes sense

34

Flat Earth General / Re: Orbital Mecanics

« on: February 07, 2018, 01:32:32 PM »

There's a mistake in equation 2.13

lol

35

Flat Earth General / Re: Black listed aircraft companies: Qantas, Lan, Latam, South African, Sichuan Airl

« on: February 07, 2018, 01:28:41 PM »

Qantas with lie of: Sydney to Santiago flights. Johannesburg to Perth flights. (flight time)

I have taken this flight, the flight time was accurate, the flight is real

As to why there is variance in flight times for different airlines, not all airlines fly the same routes, some fly into jet streams to speed up the plane, others fly to minimise fuel use to save money, and depending on weather that can also drastically affect the flight time.

A planes maximum cruise speed is not its maximum ground speed, 899km/h in the air with a 100km/h tail wind is about 999 km/h ground speed

36

Flat Earth General / Re: Translucent Moon?

« on: February 01, 2018, 02:44:05 PM »

lol

37

Flat Earth General / Re: Satellite Movement in Space

« on: February 01, 2018, 01:59:30 PM »

I should clarify, my calculation was to move the satellite 200m to the left or right, not change its altitude (I said the z axis was the force of gravity, so up or down)

I simplified it by not factoring in the effect on orbit as we are only moving 200m over a fairly short period of time. While this isnt technically correct over small distances and small time spans its accurate enough

Doing it this way means we don't have to worry about how fast its going or its altitude as it will have an initial velocity of 0 in the horizontal axis we are moving it which makes the math a lot easier

He said I could make any assumptions I wanted as long as they were accurate, and he wanted to know how much propellant would be required to move a satellite in space (which is a stupid question because the answer is any amount given enough acceleration out the back of the engine and a long enough time span)

38

Flat Earth General / Re: Satellite Movement in Space

« on: January 31, 2018, 03:29:56 PM »

You can use whatever assumptions you like. Assume that the satellite is of course by 100 Km from its place and you need to make it go their again.

If 100 is to much for you, try 10 Km and if that is too much for you try 1 Km and if that is too much for you try 100 meters and if that is too much for you, then you have to agree with me that HUSTON we have a problem.

I'm am giving you a medium size satellite at 500 Kg. remember your total mass is just 500 Kg and you are moving at over 7000 m/s.

Lets make it even simpler, you have to move the satellite 10 meters in the y direction, that is up

Satellite is moving around the earth, its velocity is 7000m/s in the x direction

There is a force of gravity in the z direction accelerating it towards the earth (this is what keeps it in orbit)

If we want to move it 200m in the y direction, we need to apply a force
Lets accelerate it 100m then decelerate it 100m

The satellites current y axis velocity is 0

d = vi * t + 1/2 * a * t^2

vi= 0
d = 100m
lets say we want to do over the course of an hour
so t = 3600 seconds

we can solve for a

acceleration required = 1/64800 m/s^2

Knowing the acceration required we can work out the force needed

f = ma
f = 500kg * 1/64800 m/s^2
f = 5/648 newtons of force

We will also need to stop our satellite so we can double this force as total amount required

f = 10/648 newtons


So we know the force required, now lets assume our satellite has a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NK-33 rocket attached (simply because I can easily find out the thrust specific fuel consumption value for this rocket easily

which is 308 g/kn.s

so lets convert our force into kn, 10/648 = 0.015, so 0.000015 kn

Now lets plug in the numbers

0.000015 * 308 * 7200 = 33.2 grams of fuel for this specific engine

39

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:35:50 PM »

Do they operate in a gravity and if so, what is the g value for it?

Well that depends how high they are

Here is a handy dandy table

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-3/The-Value-of-g

40

Flat Earth General / Re: Satellite Movement in Space

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:24:50 PM »

Do the math, I have given everything to you.

If I solve it you will say that my assumptions are wrong, so you solve it and post the results.

It's time to put up or shut up.

I will even be nice to you, you can solve in a two dimensional only, no z-axis

Good Night!

Your question is not solvable with the information you have given me

how much of a direction change do you want me to solve for? Are we trying to stop the satellite dead or alter its orbit by 0.5 degrees?

You ask me to work out how much propellent you would need to alter its direction, but the more you alter it the more propellent you will need, do you understand?

41

Flat Earth General / Re: Satellite Movement in Space

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:12:20 PM »

Change the direction how much?

A teeny amount of propellent will change its direction a teeny bit, a lot will change it a lot

problem solved

42

Flat Earth General / Re: For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:06:03 PM »

Admittedly your topic title "Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross-section area?" was ambiguous,
but surely when you are talking about shadows and eclipses you would mean the path of totality or the umbra.

I wouldn't count on it

43

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:03:27 PM »

All these video are amateur and have no control samples.

In 9 months time, everything will be settled, either way, I will post the results to close this argument once and for all

lol

44

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:00:51 PM »

Satellites don't move in a zero gravity environment?

In what environment do they operate in?

If their is an environment, then their must also be a temperature and is this higher of lower than the melting point of aluminum or titanium?

They operate in a vacuum

As to the temperature, its slightly colder but not to different from what we experience on earth, the same sun that warms our planet also warms objects orbiting our planet

45

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:54:49 PM »

Very first video

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

Moonlight 37.9
Shade 42.6
Change almost 5 degrees Celsius

That sounds like it is cooler on the direct moonlight

No, its colder not in the shade, if you do the same experiment with no moon, gasp, you get the same results

I want repeatable in a lab evidence that you can generate a light that cools things down

46

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:53:45 PM »

We are talking moving in a zero gravity environment in a vacuum

Satellites don't move in a zero gravity environment? So i'm not sure why that is a criteria

in any case, just take your vacuum pump up in the vomit commit and put a little rocket, fire extinguisher, or anything that shoots exhaust gasses out its end and you will see things move just fine

Come on dude, this stuff was known about in the 1600's, do yourself a favour and look up Issac Newtons laws of motion

47

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:49:02 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cooling+effect+of+the+moonlight[/url]

but in 9 months time I will have my own results

LOL

The very first video in that link shows exactly why the moonlight doesn't make things colder

In any case, you have proof that things are warmer in the shade at night, that's not what I asked for

Do you have any evidence that moonlight makes things colder?

48

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:44:29 PM »

I have to prove that it exists, then you have to prove that satellites can move in a vacuum!!!

Is this a joke?

Buy a vacuum pump, make a vacuum, drop something, hey look it moves

Or just watch the hundreds of videos that show this

49

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:41:27 PM »

The moonlight cools instead of warming, which does not make any sense if it reflects the sunlight

Do ya have any proof of this

50

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:38:44 PM »

If their is Aether, then the rocket has something to have friction with.

As their not being any Aether in the Universe, how can you prove that something does not exists if you don't know what it is?

I don't have to prove it doesn't exist, you have to prove it does

Where is your proof of the aether?

51

Flat Earth General / Re: For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:36:18 PM »

https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4314

Your movie was released on Released on September 9, 2015, days after the event when people where talking about the size of the shadow. In official graphics before the event, their was no penumbra shown as from the below photo which was taken from NASA websites https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/eclipse-maps

Thats because as you can see in the small scale version, the penumbra is very faint as it moves away from the umbra (true shadow) and rapidly becomes very hard if not impossible to see

It would be like a cloud moving over the sun perhaps, or a faint dimming of ambient light

The true shadow (the full obstruction of all light from the light source) is the umbra

52

Flat Earth General / Re: For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:34:21 PM »

WTF kinda crap you trying to pull Geoff?

You think we cannot read the ruler?

You start at 10 mm for the photo on the left, 9mm for the photo on the right, who knows if the ruler is level in your hands for both photos (could be tilted left or right for all we know)...

Obvious you and all the other bots cannot read the ruler either...

Honest bots would bring that shit down in an instant...

WHAT A MASSIVE FAIL!!!

LMMFAO!!!

Shadow same size as object!!!

NEXT!!!

I'm assuming this is a joke?

53

Flat Earth General / Re: For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

« on: January 31, 2018, 12:33:01 PM »

I had stated originally shadow.

The shadow is everything and yet you still have failed to provide a photo that has a smaller shadow with 1 light source or should I say the SUN

Dude you are dense.

From a point source of light that is larger than the object casting the shadow (sun, moon) the umbra will always be smaller than the object and the penumbra will always be bigger

If you don't think this is true then you clearly don't understand how to draw straight lines

54

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Data Manipulation and Hard Proof

« on: January 31, 2018, 01:58:15 AM »

I have already been to Antarctica, I was on a ship that sailed around the Antarctic Peninsula

What would you like to know?

ah... sorry. that last reply wasn't in reference to you. what did you see?

Lots of penguins, ice bergs and lots of snow, there wasn't a huge ice wall or anything but who knows, mabe it was in that bit of Antarctica i didn't go to  XD

55

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Data Manipulation and Hard Proof

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:57:05 PM »

I have already been to Antarctica, I was on a ship that sailed around the Antarctic Peninsula

What would you like to know?

56

Flat Earth General / Re: Kindred, Quantum Computers, D-Wave

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:49:09 PM »

All these clips are out of context

What about the second video I posted?

I was so let down by the first I didnt watch it

57

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:47:18 PM »

I'm saying the Moon is NOT self-luminous.

But I am, please explain why the temperature drops a few degrees when direct moonlight hits the object, than objects in the shade, that are just a few feet away.

Thats easy

Object in shade have to have something covering them, when the ground releases its heat during the night the cover traps some of that residual warmth in like a poor mans greenhouse

Areas of ground that are not in shade release their latent heat energy straight into the sky and therefore cool faster

58

Flat Earth General / Re: Super Blue Blood Moon

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:44:16 PM »

Go on what?

Sun spots can look shadowy...

They aren't shadows though, the moon has shadows, how can something that is self luminous have a shadow on its surface?

59

Flat Earth General / Re: If you think gravity is a lie, how do you explain this?

« on: January 30, 2018, 07:28:21 PM »

No matter what you state, you can't overcome the fact that buoyancy forces are stronger than gravitational forces. It is a fact. So my question is this, since they are stronger, then why is it impossible to state that the buoyancy forces is what keeps up on a Flat Earth, instead of Gravity. heavier items fall, lighter items rise do to buoyancy, gravity not needed.

"Buoyancy" is a result of gravity

If you mix oil and water in a zero-gravity environment they will not seperate without outside assistance.

Also a helium atom in 2 litres of air will neither float nor sink but just diffuse like the other air atoms in a zero-gravity environment.

60

Flat Earth General / Re: For the SE - Can an object cast a shadow smaller than its cross section area?

« on: January 30, 2018, 06:08:52 PM »

OP did talk about the moon though, they were hinting that the moon shouldn't be able to cast a shadow smaller than itself.