Has the earth's acceleration always been the same?

It seems to me, the existence of dinosaurs millions of years ago, proves the earth is flat.

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g. The round earth model does not give much likelyhood of gravity having increased over the centuries as the mass has remained roughly constant.

However, is it possible the flat earth model allows the acceleration to be, to an extent, variable?

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on March 04, 2009, 04:51:38 AM

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

Just my point....much of their time in water, not all.

Quote from: markjo on March 04, 2009, 02:00:19 PM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on March 04, 2009, 04:51:38 AM

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

Just my point....much of their time in water, not all.

How much time does a Blue Whale spend on land?

An interesting thought;  there has been much prior study supporting your claims. 

Does not really fit into my model though;  I'll have to study on this myself and see what I can deduce.

An interesting thought;  there has been much prior study supporting your claims. 

Does not really fit into my model though;  I'll have to study on this myself and see what I can deduce.

A long time has passed. Have you finished your study?

Any chance you could explain, I don't think I understand.

Acceleration of acceleration.  It's 9.8 m/s² now,  perhaps half of that millions of years ago.

Any chance you could explain, I don't think I understand.

The way I read it, this is more a debate about whether dinosaurs could have survived at a gravity of 1g (9.8 m/sē) or not.

Acceleration of acceleration.  It's 9.8 m/s² now,  perhaps half of that millions of years ago.

Doesn't that only apply to UA? Gravity doesn't accelerate forever in the same sense. Objects accelerate toward Earth but then stop doing it once they meet the surface. In UA there is constant acceleration, so it seems to me this argument works against FE if this is what he meant.

It is in reference to FET and UA. It is also an open ended question of whether that is possible, I don't see how this would necessarily work against FET as it would indicate a significant amount of time would pass before a noticeable difference is created.

It is in reference to FET and UA. It is also an open ended question of whether that is possible, I don't see how this would necessarily work against FET as it would indicate a significant amount of time would pass before a noticeable difference is created.

Maybe it isn't a problem for FET but the OP said this proves the earth is flat because dinosaurs would be only a gram, which in RE's case, doesn't make sense. Nothing about gravity suggests that a million years ago everything weighed less on earth.

According to OP, gravity must not have changed since prehistorical time because the mass of the earth hasn't changed over time (no extra mass has been added to the earth). So in RE model, the gravity has remained constant at 1g. What I cannot understand however is that OP assumes that UA is variable.

First, he said 1g not one gram, a one gram dinosaur is ludicrous.  He is talking about the fact that there is fossil evidence of massive creatures walking the earth in our past, which trump ever land animal in existence today in size by multiples, not just a small amount. The African elephant is the largest land animal alive today and it pales in comparison to a sauropod, the largest land animal known to have existed.  In fact, there were several species of dinosaur which make the elephant look like a midget.  It is this that could conceivably lead to the thought of an accelerating acceleration. 

According to OP, gravity must not have changed since prehistorical time because the mass of the earth hasn't changed over time (no extra mass has been added to the earth). So in RE model, the gravity has remained constant at 1g. What I cannot understand however is that OP assumes that UA is variable.

Put away your RE cap for just a minute and think of this through FET and UA. If the mechanism of UA is, itself,  accelerating,  then so too is the FE acceleration.  It's a rather interesting concept and explanation for the lack of gigantic animals today.

Put away your RE cap for just a minute and think of this through FET and UA. If the mechanism of UA is, itself,  accelerating,  then so too is the FE acceleration.  It's a rather interesting concept and explanation for the lack of gigantic animals today.

If you read my posts above you can see that I haven't put any cap yet

Quote from: Cartesian on September 18, 2013, 12:10:14 PM

According to OP, gravity must not have changed since prehistorical time because the mass of the earth hasn't changed over time (no extra mass has been added to the earth). So in RE model, the gravity has remained constant at 1g. What I cannot understand however is that OP assumes that UA is variable.

Put away your RE cap for just a minute and think of this through FET and UA. If the mechanism of UA is, itself,  accelerating,  then so too is the FE acceleration.  It's a rather interesting concept and explanation for the lack of gigantic animals today.

Ok then that makes sense for FET. The op was saying this proves the earth is flat though. There are already a ton of theories about the demise of dinosaurs. The most common being a meteor and that dinosaurs simply weren't able to hide from its devastation. So the cave dwelling mammals survived it because they were more apt for it. If this is a FE discussion then fine but his poke at RE is no proof at all.

Thanks for clearing up that he meant the constant g and not grams tho. I was confused. 

This is in Q&A, so it's fairly safe to assume FET is being discussed and that no debate is expected, just pointing that out.  Granted using this as proof of FET a slight jab, I doubt a debate over this as evidence of round vs flat was intended.

This is in Q&A, so it's fairly safe to assume FET is being discussed and that no debate is expected, just pointing that out.  Granted using this as proof of FET a slight jab, I doubt a debate over this as evidence of round vs flat was intended.

So it is in Q&A. If the comment about it being proof of flatness wasn't there I would have left it alone.

If it was in a debate section then probably first he would have to prove that dinosaurs could not have survived at 1g, or, how UA could be variable.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on September 18, 2013, 12:18:07 PM

Put away your RE cap for just a minute and think of this through FET and UA. If the mechanism of UA is, itself,  accelerating,  then so too is the FE acceleration.  It's a rather interesting concept and explanation for the lack of gigantic animals today.

If you read my posts above you can see that I haven't put any cap yet

You mentioned gravity not changing because the Earth's mass hasn't changed, a fact that is safe to assume but you don't know by the way.  This led me to think you weren't looking at this from a flat perspective.

I was merely repeating what OP said:

The round earth model does not give much likelyhood of gravity having increased over the centuries as the mass has remained roughly constant.

Fair enough., my mistake.

To be fair, the RE model does talk about possible change of constant (including G) over astronomical scales of time (and thus one would assume on a minute level during centuries, and there is evidence for this IIRC), though I admit - its a minority view.

It would be hard to prove the acceleration has ever been anything else than what it is today. Our understanding of the exact weight and makeup of dinosaurs is shaky at best, as we can only base it on what has survived millions of years.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on March 04, 2009, 04:51:38 AM

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

In what century do you live? Not a single known species of dinosaur lived in water (creatures like the Plesiosaur belong to a different group of reptiles)

Quote from: markjo on March 04, 2009, 02:00:19 PM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on March 04, 2009, 04:51:38 AM

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

In what century do you live? Not a single known species of dinosaur lived in water (creatures like the Plesiosaur belong to a different group of reptiles)

We actually don't know that. There are some theories supported by good reason that dinosaur's may have spent most of their time in the water.

We actually don't know that. There are some theories supported by good reason that dinosaur's may have spent most of their time in the water.

Well I haven't really bothered with dinosaurs since middle school so excuse my ignorance 

Quote from: markjo on March 04, 2009, 02:00:19 PM

Quote from: spanner34.5 on March 04, 2009, 04:51:38 AM

I propose that the largest of the dinosaurs could not have supported their own weight at 1g.

That's why the many of the largest dinosaurs spent much of their time in the water where buoyancy helped support much of their bulk.

In what century do you live? Not a single known species of dinosaur lived in water (creatures like the Plesiosaur belong to a different group of reptiles)

Not everyone cares about the strict definition of "dinosaur" when referring to ancient reptiles.