Entropy?

Without the force of gravitational attraction, why would any large object (sun, moon, other planets, and EARTH) stay together in one piece?

IT'S MAGIC!!!!  Or just the fact that the Earth is round, with gravity.

But perhaps we should concentrate on effects that we can observe in our lifetimes. (I'm intent on determining by irrefutable, repeatable observation which theory deserves my confidence.)

In general, I do agree with you, but the consequences of having entropy without gravity would mean that the earth (and therefore the universe?) is fairly young (much younger than the estimated age 4.5 billion years), no?

Entropy has nothing to do with the earth breaking apart. The earth is unmoving, as is the sun and moon. Newton stated that any object not in motion will stay at rest unless acted upon by an outside force, and since there is no force existing to act upon these objects, they stay at rest. Entropy has more to do with things like heat transfer throughout a system. You need to check your understanding of entropy.

Try again. According to the FE model supported by this site, the earth is accelerating "up" at 9.8 m/s^2.

Your beliefs hold no more weight than any other.

Holding more water means they are heavier.

Quote from: Gulliver

But perhaps we should concentrate on effects that we can observe in our lifetimes. (I'm intent on determining by irrefutable, repeatable observation which theory deserves my confidence.)

In general, I do agree with you, but the consequences of having entropy without gravity would mean that the earth (and therefore the universe?) is fairly young (much younger than the estimated age 4.5 billion years), no?

Thank you.

I believe that you may be right. However, as a skeptic, I'd have to ask for evidence. I would suspect that you'd have to spend a great deal of time to support your challenge to an acceptable level for us. Remember that RE is extraordinary. It requires us to accept something other than that our senses tells us. I see a flat horizon. I walk on a mostly flat earth. I see the Sun move in the sky. You want us to believe in RE over FE, but you haven't brought evidence. Are you sure you're right? If so, is it because someone told you so? Did you really think and observe for yourself? Can you persuade us without appealing to authority? Can you argue your position without making personal attacks?

Just trying to help,
Gulliver

Quote from: Dilla on May 16, 2007, 11:54:05 PM

Without the force of gravitational attraction, why would any large object (sun, moon, other planets, and EARTH) stay together in one piece?

IT'S MAGIC!!!!  Or just the fact that the Earth is round, with gravity.

Gravity is magic 

Remember that RE is extraordinary. It requires us to accept something other than that our senses tells us. I see a flat horizon. I walk on a mostly flat earth. I see the Sun move in the sky. You want us to believe in RE over FE, but you haven't brought evidence. Are you sure you're right? If so, is it because someone told you so? Did you really think and observe for yourself? Can you persuade us without appealing to authority? Can you argue your position without making personal attacks?

Just trying to help,
Gulliver

What exactly would you need to persuade you? I asked this before, http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=12967.0
and the only answer to the question was "Send me to the ISS". As I've said before, its impossible to prove that the earth is either round or flat. But many observations of our world* have an, IMO, poor/impractical explanation in FE, but are explained perfectly with a RE.

*(sunsets/rises, fusion in the sun, two simultaneous high tides on separate side of the earth, changing of visible stars north/south but not east/west, g differential)

What exactly would you need to persuade you? I asked this before, http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=12967.0
and the only answer to the question was "Send me to the ISS". As I've said before, its impossible to prove that the earth is either round or flat. But many observations of our world* have an, IMO, poor/impractical explanation in FE, but are explained perfectly with a RE.

*(sunsets/rises, fusion in the sun, two simultaneous high tides on separate side of the earth, changing of visible stars north/south but not east/west, g differential)

You seem to attack me as an enemy rather than a companion on a journey. I ask you to reconsider. Let me state again: Demonstrate your evidence. Make it so we can repeat it ourselves. Challenge us to see your evidence. Don't appeal to authority. Don't attack the man, just the argument. Oh, and avoid hyperbole. No one believes that RE perfectly explains all the phenomena you listed. There's still work to be done in science, though I'll have to leave it to younger and wiser people than I.

Peacefully,
Gulliver

Hahhaa I love that picture!

Though seriously, stop already