Which way is up again?

Got it, 'up' is meaningless on RE.
So if it's so meaningless, why all the debate?

Got it, 'up' is meaningless on RE.
So if it's so meaningless, why all the debate?

We dont know since you are the one who brought it up in the first place

Well what do you know about RE?
And I brought it up because it shows that FE is consistent and RE is not.

Debate? No debate here, just a continual correction of your errors.
You don't even have the backing of other FE's.

There is no consistency in FE theory. In one person's model there are inconsistencies let alone between the multitude of theories.

Unlike popularity theorists, my studies do not require the popular vote. I base my reasoning on evidence.

Well what do you know about RE?
And I brought it up because it shows that FE is consistent and RE is not.

how So?

RE cannot predict what 'up' is.

RE cannot predict what 'up' is.

why would we need to?

Because RE uses it. If it uses something it cannot define... well.

Because RE uses it. If it uses something it cannot define... well.

up is the direction that will be positive numbers. so tell me why we need to provide a single direction for that again?

Explain this:

up is the direction that will be positive numbers.

And I'll answer this:

so tell me why we need to provide a single direction for that again?

when you set up your coordinate system you will denote "up" as the direction that falls into the first quadrant of your graph, so that is why we typically use "up" as the region above our heads, after all it would look wierd if your altitude was a negative number

So you agree, 'up' is a universal direction?

up is whatever you want it to be, if you were drilling a mine shaft would it not be a bit easier to make "up" point towads the ground so as you dig deeper you will get a positive result?

So if you were victim to an avalanche, and could not orientate yourself; digging in *any* direction will get you 'up' and out?

So if you were victim to an avalanche, and could not orientate yourself; digging in *any* direction will get you 'up' and out?

no digging toward the surface will get me out, if I made my "up" in the wrong direction, I would just dig a negative distance from my origin

So 'up' can be towards the surface of the earth?

So 'up' can be towards the surface of the earth?

"UP" is the first quadrant in your coordinate system

Edit: it could also be in the second quadrant as well

..right, as you mentioned before, it can be whatever you want it to be.
Why not q3 and 4?

..right, as you mentioned before, it can be whatever you want it to be.
Why not q3 and 4?

those are negative numbers, but I guess if you really want to make that "up" then I guess you can. It is just not how I was taught

Up is an arbitrarily selected heading from your origin point. It has nothing to do with RE theory.

How is this different to FE?

Asking which way is "up" on a Round Earth is like asking which way is "out" from the centre of a ball. If you attempt to use this reasoning to prove that a Round Earth can't exist, then one could also attempt to use it to show that a ball can't exist.

Up is an arbitrarily selected heading from your origin point. It has nothing to do with RE theory.

How is this different to FE?

It demonstrates that the FES has a sense of humor.

Quote from: dyno on August 06, 2008, 06:26:39 AM

Up is an arbitrarily selected heading from your origin point. It has nothing to do with RE theory.

How is this different to FE?

It demonstrates that the FES has a sense of humor.

Wow, that's excellent. =)

Wow, Narc, you really do have trouble understanding simple concepts. Here, let me repost something I just posted on another thread:

In a gravitational field, "up" is almost always* defined to point exactly opposite to the direction of acceleration due to gravity.

Mathematically, if u have a gravitational potential given by a function G(x,y,z) then "up" points in the direction of Grad G (usually written ∇G).

*The only exception would be in an accelerating system e.g. a spacecraft.
EDIT: Or you could define "up" differently if it would make things easier, like cbarnett said, but peple usually don't.

As you can see, on Earth "up" will always be towards the sky and away from the centre of the Earth. Objects will always fall "down". On the moon, "up" will be away from the centre of the moon.

Do you understand this definition? Have you got any problems with it?

Of course, this definition would only work in RET.

So in an airplane, which is flying through the sky, which way is up?
RE'ers can't even figure out what they mean when they say 'up'.

which way is up in FET?

The direction of earths acceleration.

See how simple it is to have a theory that can give accurate definitions?

The direction of earths acceleration.

See how simple it is to have a theory that can give accurate definitions?

why is that up

By definition.

Now that I've managed to confront, and correctly answer your question, feel free to answer mine.

So in an airplane, which is flying through the sky, which way is up?
RE'ers can't even figure out what they mean when they say 'up'.