What happens at the edge of round earth?

How would a fighter jet fly when there are no gasses to fly through for lift?  Also, CO2 does not have a liquid state.  It probably just falls to the ground as ice crystals.

Uh, ever heard of propulsion? How do you think rockets work?

Can a jet fighter fly in space?  No, it needs a gaseous medium for lift.  If there is no gas for it to fly through, it will have no lift.  Not to mention that the jet engines require air to function.  No oxygen, no combustion.  Maybe you should pick up a physics book or two once in a while. 

Since we are talking about temperature, I would like to understand something about FE theory regarding the distance between Earth and the sun.  Apparently FE theory says the sun is around 3,000 miles from Earth.  I would like to know how this distance was determined.

Thanks for asking.  Modern Mechanics did an article on Wilbur Voliva that explains his calculations.  There is an illustration on page 4 of the article. 

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/5000-for-proving-the-earth-is-a-globe/

I can see that will be torn apart. You should start a new topic on that one.

I can see that will be torn apart. You should start a new topic on that one.

Oh boy, let me start:

-The sun isn't big enough, not enough gravity to start the fusion reaction
-If it did start somehow (magic) it will last less than 1 day.
-The sun should collapse on the earth at that minuscule mass.
-There's nothing stopping the sun's rays from reaching further, unless the atmosphere would absorb a few hundred times more solar energy.
-If the atmosphere would absorb more energy to not allow the light to reach further, we would all be scorched.
-The sun doesn't act like a spotlight, no matter how much you try to make physics fit this conception.
-If the stars were a dome over the earth, apart from actually seeing the same stars from almost any points using a good enough telescope (contrary to what they said), it would mean that you would see the same stars if you looked at the sky with a telescope during the day, and during the night. Clearly not the case.
-The comment about the airplane pilot is just flat out retarded xD

I think modernmechanix just wanted to have a few good laughs at this idiocy xD

Read page 6 where they agree that actual distances in Australia cause a bit of a problem for their theory...

Quote from: Starman on April 17, 2014, 07:38:15 PM

I can see that will be torn apart. You should start a new topic on that one.

Oh boy, let me start:

-The sun isn't big enough, not enough gravity to start the fusion reaction
-If it did start somehow (magic) it will last less than 1 day.
-The sun should collapse on the earth at that minuscule mass.
-There's nothing stopping the sun's rays from reaching further, unless the atmosphere would absorb a few hundred times more solar energy.
-If the atmosphere would absorb more energy to not allow the light to reach further, we would all be scorched.
-The sun doesn't act like a spotlight, no matter how much you try to make physics fit this conception.
-If the stars were a dome over the earth, apart from actually seeing the same stars from almost any points using a good enough telescope (contrary to what they said), it would mean that you would see the same stars if you looked at the sky with a telescope during the day, and during the night. Clearly not the case.
-The comment about the airplane pilot is just flat out retarded xD

I think modernmechanix just wanted to have a few good laughs at this idiocy xD

Once again, you are having trouble separating what you think you know about a big sun with what a small sun would be like.  Maybe you could stop being a smart @ss and start opening your mind.  Don't worry, you don't have to convert.  Just try accepting that a flat Earth is different from what you have been told about a round Earth. 

Quote from: Donk3y on April 18, 2014, 02:21:40 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 17, 2014, 07:38:15 PM

I can see that will be torn apart. You should start a new topic on that one.

Oh boy, let me start:

-The sun isn't big enough, not enough gravity to start the fusion reaction
-If it did start somehow (magic) it will last less than 1 day.
-The sun should collapse on the earth at that minuscule mass.
-There's nothing stopping the sun's rays from reaching further, unless the atmosphere would absorb a few hundred times more solar energy.
-If the atmosphere would absorb more energy to not allow the light to reach further, we would all be scorched.
-The sun doesn't act like a spotlight, no matter how much you try to make physics fit this conception.
-If the stars were a dome over the earth, apart from actually seeing the same stars from almost any points using a good enough telescope (contrary to what they said), it would mean that you would see the same stars if you looked at the sky with a telescope during the day, and during the night. Clearly not the case.
-The comment about the airplane pilot is just flat out retarded xD

I think modernmechanix just wanted to have a few good laughs at this idiocy xD

Once again, you are having trouble separating what you think you know about a big sun with what a small sun would be like.  Maybe you could stop being a smart @ss and start opening your mind.  Don't worry, you don't have to convert.  Just try accepting that a flat Earth is different from what you have been told about a round Earth.

Or maybe you could provide PROOF that a small sun, apart from even being possible, would work on totally new physics.

And your comments don't really make any sense. It doesn't matter if the sun is big or small since our observations and calculations apply to the sun AS WE OBSERVE IT, if it were indeed a small sun, it would still run on hydrogen fusion because THAT'S WHAT WE OBSERVE.

Logic isn't really your strong suit, is it?

You observe the fusion at the core of the sun?  Why do you make stuff up and try to pass it off as evidence? 

You observe the fusion at the core of the sun?  Why do you make stuff up and try to pass it off as evidence?

Like i said earlier you know nothing about fusion.

Quote from: Donk3y on April 18, 2014, 02:21:40 AM

Quote from: Starman on April 17, 2014, 07:38:15 PM

I can see that will be torn apart. You should start a new topic on that one.

Oh boy, let me start:

-The sun isn't big enough, not enough gravity to start the fusion reaction
-If it did start somehow (magic) it will last less than 1 day.
-The sun should collapse on the earth at that minuscule mass.
-There's nothing stopping the sun's rays from reaching further, unless the atmosphere would absorb a few hundred times more solar energy.
-If the atmosphere would absorb more energy to not allow the light to reach further, we would all be scorched.
-The sun doesn't act like a spotlight, no matter how much you try to make physics fit this conception.
-If the stars were a dome over the earth, apart from actually seeing the same stars from almost any points using a good enough telescope (contrary to what they said), it would mean that you would see the same stars if you looked at the sky with a telescope during the day, and during the night. Clearly not the case.
-The comment about the airplane pilot is just flat out retarded xD

I think modernmechanix just wanted to have a few good laughs at this idiocy xD

Once again, you are having trouble separating what you think you know about a big sun with what a small sun would be like.  Maybe you could stop being a smart @ss and start opening your mind.  Don't worry, you don't have to convert.  Just try accepting that a flat Earth is different from what you have been told about a round Earth.

So Jroa, you actually believe that sun sun is a mere 3,000 miles from Earth? (basically the same distance between London and New York). The sun must be no bigger than the size of a small country based on your theory then? Yet it has enough energy to light/heat this planet for untold billions of years...

Hers is one way it is measured.
http://www.ucolick.org/~mountain/AAA/aaawiki/doku.php?id=what_is_the_easiest_way_to_measure_the_distance_between_the_earth_and_the_sun

So Jroa, you actually believe that sun sun is a mere 3,000 miles from Earth? (basically the same distance between London and New York). The sun must be no bigger than the size of a small country based on your theory then? Yet it has enough energy to light/heat this planet for untold billions of years...

It does not take as much power to heat the Earth when it is closer. 

Hers is one way it is measured.
http://www.ucolick.org/~mountain/AAA/aaawiki/doku.php?id=what_is_the_easiest_way_to_measure_the_distance_between_the_earth_and_the_sun

That assumes a round Earth model to begin with.  Of course you are going to get a round Earth measurement. 

Quote from: Starman on April 18, 2014, 04:35:00 AM

Hers is one way it is measured.
http://www.ucolick.org/~mountain/AAA/aaawiki/doku.php?id=what_is_the_easiest_way_to_measure_the_distance_between_the_earth_and_the_sun

That assumes a round Earth model to begin with.  Of course you are going to get a round Earth measurement.

But it is a REAL measurement. What is your REAL measurement for the flat earth?

If we assume a flat Earth, then it is 3000 miles.  Once again, the shape of the Earth determines the distance to the sun, not the other way around. 

Also, Starman, your post have been starting to feel a little boring lately.  It is like you are not even trying.  Are you doing OK? 

You observe the fusion at the core of the sun?  Why do you make stuff up and try to pass it off as evidence?

It's really tiresome to have to tell you the same things a third time, so why don't you just read up?
Dar, A & Shaviv, G (1996) 'Standard solar neutrinos', ApJ 468:933-946
Christensen-Dalsgaard, Jorgen (1997) 'Helioseismology and solar neutrinos'
Christensen-Dalsgaard et al (1996) 'The current state of solar modeling', Science 272:1286-1292
Bilenky & Giunti & Grimus (1998) 'Neutrino mass spectrum and mixing from neutrino oscillation data' Talk presented by S.M. Bilenky at the Ringberg Euroconference "New Trends in Neutrino Physics", 24-29 May 1998, Ringberg Castle, Tegernsee, Germany
Ahmad et al (SNO)(2002a) 'Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral-current interactions inthe Sudbury neutrino observatory'
Eddington, Arthur Stanley (1920) The internal constitution of stars, Nature 106:14-20
Eddington, Arthur Stanley (1924) On the relation between the masses and luminosities of the stars Mon Not R Astr Soc 84:308-322
Fukuda et al (Super-Kamiokande)(1998a) 'Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos', Phys.Rev.Lett. 81 (1998) 1562-1567
Gough et al (1996a) 'Perspectives in helioseismology', Science 272:1281-1283
Guenther, D B & Demarque, P(1997) 'Seismic tests of the sun's interior structure, composition, and age, and implications for solar neutrinos', ApJ 484:937-959
Hathaway et al (1996) 'GONG observations of solar surface flows', Science 272:1306-1309
Normile, Dennis (1998a) 'Heavy news on solar neutrinos', Science 280:1839
Pastor, Sergio (1998) 'New tests for neutrinos in low-energy solar experiments'
Petrera, Sergio (1998) 'Experiments at large undergound detectors', Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl. 70 (1999) 399-408
Stix, M (1998) 'Solar Models ', in Proc 4th Ringberg Workshop
Thompson et al (1996) 'Differential rotation and dynamics of the solar interior', Science 272:1300-1305

There are more, they all converge on the same thing. Until you have a library even a quarter this size, all your claims are weightless.

Quote from: Starman on April 18, 2014, 04:35:00 AM

Hers is one way it is measured.
http://www.ucolick.org/~mountain/AAA/aaawiki/doku.php?id=what_is_the_easiest_way_to_measure_the_distance_between_the_earth_and_the_sun

That assumes a round Earth model to begin with.  Of course you are going to get a round Earth measurement. 

Wrong, it doesn't assume a round earth. This illustration will show you why:



The Venus-Earth distance was known through radio signals, as it clearly says there, and the distance to the sun is calculated trigonometrically using (distance of Sun-Earth) = (distance of Earth-Venus)*(cosine(angle)), as it clearly states there. You only have to wait until the angle Venus-Earth-Sun is 90 degrees.

If it is so tiresome, then stop telling me the same thing over and over.  I asked you a question, and you refuse to answer it, because you know a truthful answer will make you look dumb.  'Nuff said. 

If we assume a flat Earth, then it is 3000 miles.  Once again, the shape of the Earth determines the distance to the sun, not the other way around. 

Also, Starman, your post have been starting to feel a little boring lately.  It is like you are not even trying.  Are you doing OK?

Don't worry about me I am here many hours day. The is very few FE'ers here to respond to. Besides you are diverting the subject.

If it is so tiresome, then stop telling me the same thing over and over.  I asked you a question, and you refuse to answer it, because you know a truthful answer will make you look dumb.  'Nuff said.

And your response to the method of measuring the sun is what?

If it is so tiresome, then stop telling me the same thing over and over.  I asked you a question, and you refuse to answer it, because you know a truthful answer will make you look dumb.  'Nuff said.

So I take it you're not intellectual enough to read a few scientific papers? Understandable, not everybody can be an academician. But on to the main problem:
You're asking the same stupid question I've already answered a few times: Mainly solar neutrinos, and also some x-rays and gamma radiation.
If you want even MORE evidence, try helioseismology...

Quote from: Starman on April 18, 2014, 04:35:00 AM

Hers is one way it is measured.
http://www.ucolick.org/~mountain/AAA/aaawiki/doku.php?id=what_is_the_easiest_way_to_measure_the_distance_between_the_earth_and_the_sun

That assumes a round Earth model to begin with.  Of course you are going to get a round Earth measurement. 

Wrong, it doesn't assume a round earth. This illustration will show you why:



The Venus-Earth distance was known through radio signals, as it clearly says there, and the distance to the sun is calculated trigonometrically using (distance of Sun-Earth) = (distance of Earth-Venus)*(cosine(angle)), as it clearly states there. You only have to wait until the angle Venus-Earth-Sun is 90 degrees.