GPS

GPS: most of us have used it or come into contact with it at some point. Since flat earth theory can't have satellites orbiting the planet (since it isn't one, apparently) FE'ers reflexively throw GPS into the "Government-sold conspiracy" bin.

But, wait, the strange thing about GPS is, conspiracy or not, it undoubtably works. You can test this yourself. Buy a GPS reciever and put it in your car, or rent a car with GPS. Drive around. What you'll notice is rather shocking: the GPS map on your receiver will match your surroundings! Now, there are two theories I can see here.

1) GPS is working exactly like it's supposed to, by contacting satellites in Earth's orbit and triangulating the position of the receiver.

OR

2) GPS works by some others means, with its "official" modus operandi a ploy to foist round earth theory.

There are other GPS issues, such as the Army's use of GPS laptops and receivers. If the government uses GPS to further its conspiracy (which must have some benefit) it doesn't make money; the government has to buy (spend!) money to get GPS equipment from companies like Magellan, who get the contracts and design the goods.

*imagines FE'er in Iraq telling soldier not to trust his GPS-capable laptop*

so?

He forgot the part about flat earth gravity theory not allowing for satelites to exist.

He forgot the part about flat earth gravity theory not allowing for satelites to exist.

Yeah but he included the "other means" clause, which covers, well, other means.  So satellites don't *need* to exist.  See?

I guess what I was trying to say was:

"Flat Earthers, if GPS doesn't work by using satellites, which you say don't exist, how does it work?"

I guess what I was trying to say was:

"Flat Earthers, if GPS doesn't work by using satellites, which you say don't exist, how does it work?"

Ah, okay.  Towers.

-Erasmus

That's probably the most logical alternative, I was thinking along the lines of some sort of internal gyroscope but towers are better. It would be interesting to scan the spectrum for government-owned frequencies with no apparent use.

Quote from: "fuzzy901"

I guess what I was trying to say was:

"Flat Earthers, if GPS doesn't work by using satellites, which you say don't exist, how does it work?"

Ah, okay.  Towers.

-Erasmus

Are these towers 10000's of feet tall? or are they placed all over, within miles of eachothers.  Are they those big towers they try to make look like trees, cause i thought those were for telephones.

Are these towers 10000's of feet tall? or are they placed all over, within miles of eachothers.  Are they those big towers they try to make look like trees, cause i thought those were for telephones.

The towers would have to pretty pretty tall, yes.  In theory you only need three, but for redundancy, I expect they are strategically placed in various ultra-secret locations.  The towers are likely made of an ultralight polymer composite which can withstand the strain of holding up a radio transciever several miles above the ground and still be only pencil-thin, and thus difficult to spot.

-Erasmus

with the new age technology we have we wouldnt need satelited all we need is radio towers. I mean your phone can tell you where you are, because every radio tower has its location programmed into it. You dont need satelites for a GPS like program. Just some type of signla tower.

with the new age technology we have we wouldnt need satelited all we need is radio towers. I mean your phone can tell you where you are, because every radio tower has its location programmed into it. You dont need satelites for a GPS like program. Just some type of signla tower.

How can your phone tell you where you are?

Quote from: "I are a believer"

with the new age technology we have we wouldnt need satelited all we need is radio towers. I mean your phone can tell you where you are, because every radio tower has its location programmed into it. You dont need satelites for a GPS like program. Just some type of signla tower.

How can your phone tell you where you are?

Well, you kow how area codes work? well its somewhat like that, and also signal towers are placed in specific location, just a bit of coding, i mean if your sensible you could see how its possible to understand how you dont neccisarly need satelites to have a type of thing to tell you where you are.

How can your phone tell you where you are?

GPS works by putting something that knows where it is in a fixed place.  The GPS thing can also tell how far it is from you, so it knows that you're standing on the surface of a sphere centered around it.

If there are two such GPS things, then you must be standing on the intersection of the two spheres, which is a circle.  If there is a third, then you must be standing on the intersection of the new sphere and the previous circle, which is just two points.  Finally, it's likely that only one of those points is on the surface of the Earth.   Or, you could use a fourth GPS thing, which cuts it down to just one point.

At no point did I make any assumptions about whether the GPS thing is floating out in space, or is connected to the ground.

So if your cell phone has a GPS receiver in it, it can tell you where you are; this does not mean that there are necessarily GPS satellites in orbit, just that there are GPS things doing GPS.

-Erasmus

Or..It could just be satelites.

Or..It could just be satelites.

Sure sure.  But is it really hard to believe that it could be towers?  I mean, cell phones and other radios are tower-based.... why not GPS?

So your saying that the spread of cell phone towers is just an atmept by the conspericy to hide the fact that there really are no satallites?

no we're saying its hypothetically possible. We don't really believe it.

Quote from: "I are a believer"

Or..It could just be satelites.

Sure sure.  But is it really hard to believe that it could be towers?  I mean, cell phones and other radios are tower-based.... why not GPS?

Cell phones give you your location by identifying the tower with the strongest signal, the closest one. This requires one cellphone tower in each area to identify.

GPS can give you your position, to within 10 square meters (yards for the US). If both use the same system, this would require one tower for every 10 square yards, including the ones over the ocean.

So the same system is ruled out. Triangulation between signals could however be possible.

Using this theory of really tall towers, GPS could be acheived without the need for a round earth. On a stationary, or non-relativistic-speed earth, this would work.

However, since the earth is accelarating, and by now has exceeded the speed of light, all these signals from towers are going straight to the base of the tower and not anywhere else (except from through the planet due to blueshifting from the speed).

GPS or gravity, flatearth can't have both.

Using this theory of really tall towers, GPS could be acheived without the need for a round earth. On a stationary, or non-relativistic-speed earth, this would work.

However, since the earth is accelarating, and by now has exceeded the speed of light, all these signals from towers are going straight to the base of the tower and not anywhere else (except from through the planet due to blueshifting from the speed).

You really must dissuade yourself of this notion that light is affected by your "absolute velocity."  First, the latter concept is meaningless.  Secondly, light's velocity is not affected by the relative speeds between reference frames.

In fact, even ordinary objects don't work this way.  If you were standing at the top of a cell tower, and threw a ball to your friend on the ground twenty meters away, the speed at which the ground was rushing up would have absolutely no effect on the ball's trajectory.

So I'll ask what seems to be my catchall counter: "When you say the Earth has 'exceeded the speed of light', I must ask, '... relative to what?'."

-Erasmus

Erasmus: I trust Silent Knight. I know Silent Knight.

  Please explain what you mean. I "get" what Silent Knight says. I don't get what you say.

1. You know so much, I don't have the means of understanding you

2. You make no sence. There is no meaning behind the fancy words.

3. A pleasent mix of 1&2. I'm new to this FE thing, but I'm not stupid either.

Please explain what you mean.

Okay, so here's how relativity works.

Suppose Alice and Bob are flying along in two different spaceships, ship A and ship B.  Suppose they're flying in the same direction, and that Bob's ship is going v meters per second faster than Alice's.

Alice's ship and Bob's ship are called "reference frames".  They're basically places you can take measurements from.  Two reference frames are the same if they're moving in the same direction at the same speed.  Alice and Bob are moving different speeds, so they're in difference reference frames.  Einstein's relativity assumes that in two different reference frames, people will measure the same thing differently, except the speed of light.  That is, all measurements except the speed of light are "relative the the observer."  Everybody, no matter how fast they're moving, measures the speed of light as being a certain constant "c".  Everything else, however, will appear different in different frames.

But, within a given reference frame, where everything is moving the same velocity, relativity has *no* effect.  Since velocity is relative, the only time you see the effects (time slowing down, objects getting shorter) is when you observe something that's moving faster or slower than you.

On the Flat Earth, everything is moving "upward" at the same speed as the Earth.  So, from the perspective of people on the flat Earth, there are no relativistic effects.  Somebody outside, in a spaceship watching the Earth whizz by, will see the effects: the Earth will get even flatter, time on the Earth will slow down, and its mass will increase, though of course the speed of light on the Earth will always be the same to him.

From the perspective of people on the Earth, everything that happens on the Earth will appear normal.  They also will not notice that the Earth's (or their own) mass has increased.  However, they will notice relativistic effects of length contraction, time dilation, and mass increase on the spaceship.

This idea of the mass increasing is an important one, because the amount of force required to move an object changes based on its mass (F=ma).  On the Earth, like I said, you do not notice this change, so you have to apply the same force to, say, lift a 1 kg box no matter how fast the Earth is moving.  From an outside perspective, however, it will appear either that accelerations ("a") decrease, or forces ("F") increase.

So assuming that the Earth is propelled upwards by a constant force, an outside observer will see that the flat Earth's upward acceleration decreases over time.  We will not notice this; it will always appear to us that the Earth is accelerating upwards at 1g.  Once the Earth is moving the speed of light (relative to, say, Bob), it will appear to Bob that it is not accelerating at all (but it will appear to us that it is accelerating at 1g).

So that's what relativity means.  If you're still not sure what a reference frame is, let me know.  The important thing is that inside a reference frame, everything is "normal".  It's only when you compare two different reference frames that you start to see the effects of relativity.  It's also important to understand that the speed of light is not a brick wall that makes you suddenly stop accelerating; it's just that people in other reference frames see your acceleration always decreasing as you go faster and faster.

Anyway, hope this helps.  If you're still fuzzy on it, let me know about which part in particular I can be more clear.

-Erasmus