Here's a question...

Bah the line always seems to stop short of rape. Oh well, bedtime for me methinks.

In Britland you can get away with anything, so you can never cross the line. 

Night night, the thread is ruined.

We must persevere!

No, when Gayer leaves it's usually over.  It's kind of how it works.

Expect your thread to be moved being we took it way off topic.

Once again, damn.

I'll rediscover it tomorrow, then.

BTW, I figured out why you put 5 question marks and there were only 3 on your post.  It's because when you put 3 question marks together, this smilie comes up:

Perfect

Don't even try typing "lemon".

lime

Quote

I'm assuming that Post (first pilot to fly solo around the world) also went in a circle?

Yep. The compass always points North. North is situated in the center of the FE. Therefore, the directions of East and West will be curved.

Quote

No, circumnavigation is not possible on FE without redefining the term. See the RE Primer.

Merriam Webster's Dictionary disagrees with you.

cir·cum·nav·i·gate /ˌsɜrkəmˈnævɪˌgeɪt/
–verb (used with object), -gat·ed, -gat·ing.
1. to sail or fly around; make the circuit of by navigation: to circumnavigate the earth.
2. to go or maneuver around: to circumnavigate the heavy downtown traffic.

From the RE Primer:

Circumnavigation has different meanings to each model. In RE, circumnavigation means (in the most precise terms) travelling one Great Circle about the Earth. (In a more relaxed definition, the travel need only cross the Equator and every meridian). In FE, the definition is changed, probably just to confuse the debate. In FE you may “circumnavigate” the Earth by traveling the entire Equator. Since circumnavigation is not formally defined on the FE, FEers are merely playing a word game when they say that circumnavigation is possible on the FE.

What the hell?  I typed lymon (with an e substituting the y; I did this so it wouldn't get substituted again) (you should have known that was going to happen) and lime popped out. 

Toldja.

In FE, the definition is changed ... Since circumnavigation is not formally defined on the FE, FEers are merely playing a word game when they say that circumnavigation is possible on the FE.

Yes, Tom has contacts at various dictionaries. 

Gimme a break. Stop trying to ignore plain definitions.

Circumnavigation has different meanings to each model. In RE, circumnavigation means (in the most precise terms) travelling one Great Circle about the Earth. (In a more relaxed definition, the travel need only cross the Equator and every meridian).

Do you have a source for these specific definitions of the word?
[/list]

Quote from: Gulliver on June 26, 2007, 04:00:20 PM

In FE, the definition is changed ... Since circumnavigation is not formally defined on the FE, FEers are merely playing a word game when they say that circumnavigation is possible on the FE.

Yes, Tom has contacts at various dictionaries. 

Gimme a break. Stop trying to ignore plain definitions.

The definition of "circumnavigation of the Earth" is well-defined. I'm surprised that someone as particular as you didn't google it to see that it is defined as I said. Now I have to do your work too: Wikipedia

The definition of "circumnavigation of the Earth" is well-defined. I'm surprised that someone as particular as you didn't google it to see that it is defined as I said. Now I have to do your work too: Wikipedia

"To circumnavigate a place, such as an island, a continent, or the Earth, is to travel all the way around it by boat or ship." - Wikipedia

Even this is up to subjectivity depending on what constitutes going "around" and is open to both theories. The only reason I jumped on your statement is because of the implication that FE is pulling definitions out of their ass when they are clearly available and applicable from the dictionary for both theories. You might want to update your Primer with something more accurate.

Quote from: Gulliver on June 26, 2007, 05:00:08 PM

The definition of "circumnavigation of the Earth" is well-defined. I'm surprised that someone as particular as you didn't google it to see that it is defined as I said. Now I have to do your work too: Wikipedia

Clever, you use "circumnavigation" in your posts, and then switch to "circumnavigation of the Earth" to try and evade it.

Either way - "To circumnavigate a place, such as an island, a continent, or the Earth, is to travel all the way around it by boat or ship." - Wikipedia

Even this is up to subjectivity depending on what constitutes going "around" basically.

Nope. You're being a jerk. I've always used circumnavigation in turn of global circumnavigation. Every question anyone ever posted about circumnavigation dealt with global circumnavigation. Not going around a picnic table, not going around the Maypole, not going around the South Pole, or even the North Pole.

Is it impossible to have two points antipodal to each other on a flat surface?  Because really that's all that's entailed in the definition (reference: http://www.expedition360.com/home/circumnavigation.htm, the source cited by your Wikipedia link as defining circumnavigation).  It looks to me like Wikipedia added the "Great Circle" part themselves (and as you pointed out, this isn't even technically necessary for it to be considered a circumnavigation: reference Magellan's crew's circumnavigation of the globe; it seems to me that this is really just implied in the case of circumnavigation of the earth, because the earth is taken to be a sphere).

Let's not forget that Wikipedia isn't always reliable.  But even though, check out this quote (which you alluded to):

In yacht racing, a round-the-world route approximating a great circle would be quite impractical, particularly in a non-stop race where use of the Panama and Suez Canals would be impossible. Yacht racing therefore defines a world circumnavigation to be a passage of at least 21,600 nautical miles (40,000 km) in length which crosses the equator, crosses every meridian in the same direction and finishes in the same port as it starts

There is no reason why circumnavigation should be impossible under this definition on a flat earth.  So I really don't see where you're going with your word games, Gulliver.

I agree with Divito.  If the RE Primer is to be considered reliable, you should really think about changing your argument about circumnavigation in it.

My other post is updated.

But anyways, let's look at the other definition.

"A basic definition of a world circumnavigation would be a route which covers at least a great circle, and in particular one which passes through at least one pair of points antipodal to each other."

A great circle is only applicable on a sphere. "World circumnavigation" is not possible on an FE as defined above. You would have to use the other aforementioned definition of the word to attempt to get a meaningful answer. Attacking FE'ers because they utilize the only definition applicable to their beliefs doesn't help your argument.

Is it impossible to have two points antipodal to each other on a flat surface?  Because really that's all that's entailed in the definition (reference: http://www.expedition360.com/home/circumnavigation.htm, the source cited by your Wikipedia link as defining circumnavigation).  It looks to me like Wikipedia added the "Great Circle" part themselves (and as you pointed out, this isn't even technically necessary for it to be considered a circumnavigation: reference Magellan's crew's circumnavigation of the globe; it seems to me that this is really just implied in the case of circumnavigation of the earth, because the earth is taken to be a sphere).

Let's not forget that Wikipedia isn't always reliable.  But even though, check out this quote (which you alluded to):

Quote

In yacht racing, a round-the-world route approximating a great circle would be quite impractical, particularly in a non-stop race where use of the Panama and Suez Canals would be impossible. Yacht racing therefore defines a world circumnavigation to be a passage of at least 21,600 nautical miles (40,000 km) in length which crosses the equator, crosses every meridian in the same direction and finishes in the same port as it starts

There is no reason why circumnavigation should be impossible under this definition on a flat earth.  So I really don't see where you're going with your word games, Gulliver.

No, antipodal is a word used only in spherical geometry.
Yes, that quote is paraphrased in the RE Primer that I just posted.
Magellan's crew met the definition.
Sure, just like I said FE must use a different definition than the well-defined definition used in describing such a feat in RE.

No, antipodal is a word used only in spherical geometry.

Not true.  That's just one definition of the word.  The other definition has to do with two points diametrically opposed to each other.

Yes, that quote is paraphrased in the RE Primer that I just posted.

As I pointed out.  So let's stop using the term "great circle" to describe a circumnavigation as it is clearly not necessary.

Magellan's crew met the definition.

And would on a flat earth as well.

Sure, just like I said FE must use a different definition than the well-defined definition used in describing such a feat in RE.

Looks like they can use the same definition to me.

And here's another quote from your Wikipedia article:

Aviation records take account of the wind circulation patterns of the world; in particular the jet streams, which circulate in the northern and southern hemispheres without crossing the equator. There is therefore no requirement to cross the equator, or to pass through two antipodal points, in the course of setting a round-the-world aviation record. Thus, for example, Steve Fosset's global circumnavigation by balloon was entirely contained within the southern hemisphere.

Apparently it's possible to describe something as circumnavigation without there even being a passage through the equator, or through two antipodes.

My other post is updated.

But anyways, let's look at the other definition.

"A basic definition of a world circumnavigation would be a route which covers at least a great circle, and in particular one which passes through at least one pair of points antipodal to each other."

A great circle is only applicable on a sphere. "World circumnavigation" is not possible on an FE as defined above. You would have to use the other aforementioned definition of the word to attempt to get a meaningful answer. Attacking FE'ers because they utilize the only definition applicable to their beliefs doesn't help your argument.

You're quite right. Circumnavigation is not possible on the FE. But it's up to the FEers to say that they're using the different definition. Go after them, not me. They're playing word games, and you're enabling them.

Actually, Divito's wrong about this, since "great circle" does not in any way have to be part of the definition of "circumnavigation".

Not true.  That's just one definition of the word.  The other definition has to do with two points diametrically opposed to each other.

Was just about to touch on that. Antipodes exist on a flat Earth as they do on a spherical one.

You're quite right. Circumnavigation is not possible on the FE. But it's up to the FEers to say that they're using the different definition. Go after them, not me. They're playing word games, and you're enabling them.

Are you dense? "WORLD CIRCUMNAVIGATION" (as defined on Wikipedia) is not possible on an FE, as per the FE is not a sphere, and a great circle is inclusive of a sphere. Nowhere did I say circumnavigation was not possible on an FE since the definition of that is clear. Why you choose to lump them together is beyond me.

Actually, Divito's wrong about this, since "great circle" does not in any way have to be part of the definition of "circumnavigation".

I'm not wrong, he just took what he wanted from my post. See above.

Quote from: Gulliver on June 26, 2007, 05:30:23 PM

No, antipodal is a word used only in spherical geometry.

Not true.  That's just one definition of the word.  The other definition has to do with two points diametrically opposed to each other.

Both definitions deal with spherical geometry. Show me a contemporary, non-FE, use otherwise.

Quote from: Roundy the One and Only on June 26, 2007, 05:34:54 PM

Not true.  That's just one definition of the word.  The other definition has to do with two points diametrically opposed to each other.

Was just about to touch on that. Antipodes exist on a flat Earth as they do on a spherical one.

How so? Where's a definition that doesn't deal with spherical geometry? And does then cicumnavigation on FE involve going to the edge?

Both definitions deal with spherical geometry. Show me a contemporary, non-FE, use otherwise.

antipodal

1.   Geography. on the opposite side of the globe; pertaining to the antipodes.
2.   diametrically opposite
3.   Botany. (in a developing ovule) of or at the end opposite to the micropyle

antipode

A direct or diametrical opposite

diametric

1.   of, pertaining to, or along a diameter.
2.   in direct opposition; being at opposite extremes; complete

No mention of a sphere other than one instance of "globe" or geometry.

Circles have diameters last time I checked.

Quote from: Gulliver on June 26, 2007, 05:35:35 PM

You're quite right. Circumnavigation is not possible on the FE. But it's up to the FEers to say that they're using the different definition. Go after them, not me. They're playing word games, and you're enabling them.

Are you dense? "WORLD CIRCUMNAVIGATION" (as defined on Wikipedia) is not possible on an FE, as per the FE is not a sphere, and a great circle is inclusive of a sphere. Nowhere did I say circumnavigation was not possible on an FE since the definition of that is clear. Why you choose to lump them together is beyond me.

Quote from: Roundy the One and Only on June 26, 2007, 05:36:44 PM

Actually, Divito's wrong about this, since "great circle" does not in any way have to be part of the definition of "circumnavigation".

I'm not wrong, he just took what he wanted from my post. See above.

You're being dense. That's what I've said. FE must resort to a different definiton of circumnavigating the Earth than the well-constructed one used in RE. It's incumbent on the FEers to explain that they've switch definitions. They're playing a word game, and you're enabling them.

Quote from: Gulliver on June 26, 2007, 05:45:08 PM

Both definitions deal with spherical geometry. Show me a contemporary, non-FE, use otherwise.

antipodal

1.   Geography. on the opposite side of the globe; pertaining to the antipodes.
2.   diametrically opposite
3.   Botany. (in a developing ovule) of or at the end opposite to the micropyle

antipode

A direct or diametrical opposite

diametric

1.   of, pertaining to, or along a diameter.
2.   in direct opposition; being at opposite extremes; complete

No mention of a sphere other than one instance of "globe" or geometry.

Circles have diameters last time I checked.

I'm still waiting on a use that does not involve a sphere...