The Dealy Sun

  • 38 Replies
  • 10474 Views
?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant
The Dealy Sun
« on: January 10, 2008, 04:30:21 PM »
The sun in the FE model is simply impossible. The sun is of course, powered by nuclear fusion. The Tsar Bomba that the Russians developed was only 8 meters long, and would have killed any human life for hundreds of miles. The sun, according to the FE model, is only 3000 miles away, and is a globe of 32 miles in diameter. If this were true, the earth would become barren, even with the atmosphere.

?

Bushido

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2008, 04:33:35 PM »
Numerical estimates or it doesn't hold.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2008, 04:36:55 PM »
Some REers claim that the FE sun is too close and would burn up all life on earth.

Other REers claim that the FE sun is too small and would not provide enough heat to sustain life.

But did they ever stop and think for a moment that the sun is small enough and close enough to the earth that it creates the proper amount of warmth?

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2008, 05:03:15 PM »
I thought that the Planets revolved around the Sun....

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #4 on: January 10, 2008, 05:19:14 PM »
Some REers claim that the FE sun is too close and would burn up all life on earth.

Other REers claim that the FE sun is too small and would not provide enough heat to sustain life.

But did they ever stop and think for a moment that the sun is small enough and close enough to the earth that it creates the proper amount of warmth?
Well, when powered by coal, no.
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2008, 05:22:41 PM »
Accepted figures for the Sun
Energy emitted at the surface = 63 000 000Wm^-2
Radius = 700000km
Earth-Sun distance = 149 600 000km(rounded)

Inverse square law of radiation
S/(4*PI*r^2)=I

S/(4*PI*700000^2)=63*10^12W/km^2
S=(6.1*10^12)*63*10^12
S=3.9^10^26      387,923,860,865,267,669,085

Inverse square 149600000/700000=213 radius to Earth
1/213^2=1/45521
Intensity at Earth = 8.5*10^15

For the RE Sun

FE Sun
To receive the same amount of energy on Earth I at the Earth must be constant

Radius = 25.6km
Earth-Sun distance = 4800km

1/188^2=1/35344
8.5*10^15=(1/35344)*I
I=2.4*10^11


S/(4*PI*2400^2) = 2.4*10^11
S=72382294*241112097413
S=1.7*10^19

Volume difference
4/3*PI*r^3

RE Sun = 1.4*10^18 cubic kilometers

FE Sun = 70276 cubic kilometers

The FE Sun is 1.9^10^13 times smaller than the RE Sun.

What method of energy production is assumed to power a sphere this size to produce the energies above?
What powers keep the FE Sun from exploding due to the contained energy?

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2008, 07:26:43 PM »
Nicely done mathematics, an excellent support for RE!
Don't try to argue with an idiot.  They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #7 on: January 11, 2008, 05:13:52 AM »
I thought that the Planets revolved around the Sun....

they do
Quote from: jack
I'm special.

*

Gabe

  • 485
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2008, 11:31:33 AM »
bump?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
There is no evidence for an infinite Earth.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The Earth is infinite.
Warning, you have just lowered your IQ by reading my sig.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2008, 12:15:50 PM »
The mechanism which powers the sun is unknown. No one has been inside the sun to study its mechanism.

?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2008, 12:18:12 PM »
The only way a big thing of hydrogen can make other elements is through fusion.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17562
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2008, 12:24:20 PM »
The only way we know of that a big thing of hydrogen can make other elements is through fusion.
fixed

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2008, 03:01:29 PM »
Quote
fixed
Isn't the fact there there may be a different way the RE sun generates energy irrelevant? The problem here isn't the possibility of the RE sun generating energy differently, it the lack of a way for a FE sun to do it.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17562
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2008, 03:29:49 PM »
If there may be another way for the RE sun to generate energy that we don't know of, who says that FE sun couldn't be using that same mechanism?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2008, 03:37:01 PM »
Obviously in order for the FE sun to work some of our RE assumptions about the sun must be wrong.  And I have to agree with Tom here; since we've never been to the sun to study first-hand what's powering it, we can only really guess based on our observations.  And some of those observations must be based on the assumption that the earth is round and the sun is 93 million miles away, since these were in place before we understood nuclear fusion.

The fact is that what powers the sun is anybody's guess in FE, which isn't that far removed from the truth about the sun in RE, since we have no way of knowing for sure (at present, at least) that we are right about it.  People act like this is a violation of physics, but in truth our understanding of physics changes constantly; like Username implied, there could easily be an unknown mechanism powering the sun that (from an RE perspective, at least) mimics the effects of nuclear fusion.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2008, 03:47:43 PM »
Quote
If there may be another way for the RE sun to generate energy that we don't know of, who says that FE sun couldn't be using that same mechanism?

Who says that the RE sun couldn't use it?

The problem I see it that finding another method may make the FE model more valid, but it wouldn't make the RE model any less valid. Based on theories of the suns energy productions alone, the RE theory would still be just as acceptable as the FE theory. The FE sun needs a acceptable method of energy production that the RE sun couldn't have.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17562
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #16 on: January 12, 2008, 04:58:31 PM »
Quote
If there may be another way for the RE sun to generate energy that we don't know of, who says that FE sun couldn't be using that same mechanism?

Who says that the RE sun couldn't use it?
No one did...

Quote
The problem I see it that finding another method may make the FE model more valid, but it wouldn't make the RE model any less valid. Based on theories of the suns energy productions alone, the RE theory would still be just as acceptable as the FE theory. The FE sun needs a acceptable method of energy production that the RE sun couldn't have.

I disagree.

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #17 on: January 13, 2008, 07:35:07 AM »
The FE sun is powered by Jesus remember?
The Earth is round. Get the hell over it.
Dude, look at this!!! Seriously!!!
And this too!!!

?

Bushido

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #18 on: January 13, 2008, 11:25:07 AM »
The FE sun is powered by Jesus remember?

Thank you. Finally someone who makes sense.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #19 on: January 13, 2008, 11:30:24 AM »
The method of power for the FE sun must be totally alien to all forms of energy creation we know of. something small enough to fit Rowbotham's perspective measurements, yet able to maintain it's own structural cohesion despite a reaction inside creating more energy per square inch than the RE's sun, which is thousands of times bigger.

Solve the problem of the sun's power and you'll be a millionaire if you can work power stations with it.

?

Bushido

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #20 on: January 13, 2008, 11:34:51 AM »
Solve the problem of the sun's power and you'll be a millionaire if you can work power stations with it.

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Matthew 22:21

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #21 on: January 13, 2008, 03:28:11 PM »
There is evidence of fusion in stars by emission & absorption spectra. These allow the composition to be determined. Looking at other stars will give different spectra according to the different stages of their stellar evolution.
These experiments can be determined using university grade gas discharge lamps. Stellar spectra can be easily obtained as well.  This cannot be linked to any "conspiracy".

What is the FE opinion on this?

Whatever the FE Sun's method of energy production, it seems to produce the same spectra as the RE fusion star model.

?

Bushido

Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2008, 03:52:08 PM »
Accepted figures for the Sun
Energy emitted at the surface = 63 000 000Wm^-2
Radius = 700000km
Earth-Sun distance = 149 600 000km(rounded)

Inverse square law of radiation
S/(4*PI*r^2)=I

S/(4*PI*700000^2)=63*10^12W/km^2
S=(6.1*10^12)*63*10^12
S=3.9^10^26      387,923,860,865,267,669,085

Inverse square 149600000/700000=213 radius to Earth
1/213^2=1/45521
Intensity at Earth = 8.5*10^15

For the RE Sun

FE Sun
To receive the same amount of energy on Earth I at the Earth must be constant

Radius = 25.6km
Earth-Sun distance = 4800km

1/188^2=1/35344
8.5*10^15=(1/35344)*I
I=2.4*10^11


S/(4*PI*2400^2) = 2.4*10^11
S=72382294*241112097413
S=1.7*10^19

Volume difference
4/3*PI*r^3

RE Sun = 1.4*10^18 cubic kilometers

FE Sun = 70276 cubic kilometers

The FE Sun is 1.9^10^13 times smaller than the RE Sun.

What method of energy production is assumed to power a sphere this size to produce the energies above?
What powers keep the FE Sun from exploding due to the contained energy?

Please use measuring units, scientific notation so that we can actually read the numbers. Also, what was the point of your calculation?

?

The Terror

  • 1776
  • Flat Earth Propane Tank
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #23 on: January 13, 2008, 04:58:57 PM »
Can't be that difficult to study the sun if it's only 3000 miles away

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #24 on: January 13, 2008, 05:01:29 PM »
Can't be that difficult to study the sun if it's only 3000 miles away

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles. Ergo, the sun would be an equal distance above the equator.

Using observable data I've demonstrated that the sun is 3,000 miles away on the Flat Earth model.

Are you able to demonstrate for us that the sun is actually 93,000,000 miles away? I'd like to see something which calculates the sun to be 93,000,000 miles away.

If you REers cannot do that then what reason is there to believe that the sun is 93,000,000 miles away?
« Last Edit: January 13, 2008, 05:04:31 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #26 on: January 13, 2008, 05:10:12 PM »
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=582

That link already assumes that the sun is very far away.

The method described makes the following assumption:

    "The orbit of the Earth around the Sun is an ellipse with semi-major axis of 149.6 million kilometres and an eccentricity of 0.017."

The article then goes on to give us an equation, using the assumption of a far away sun, whereby we could find the distance to the sun on any day of the year.

The link is irrelevant for our purposes because we're seeking to demonstrate that the sun is very far away in the first place.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2008, 05:14:23 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

The Terror

  • 1776
  • Flat Earth Propane Tank
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #27 on: January 13, 2008, 05:14:32 PM »
Can't be that difficult to study the sun if it's only 3000 miles away

On March 21-22 the sun is directly overhead at the equator and appears 45 degrees above the horizon at 45 degrees north and south latitude. As the angle of sun above the earth at the equator is 90 degrees while it is 45 degrees at 45 degrees north or south latitude, it follows that the angle at the sun between the vertical from the horizon and the line from the observers at 45 degrees north and south must also be 45 degrees. The result is two right angled triangles with legs of equal length. The distance between the equator and the points at 45 degrees north or south is approximately 3,000 miles. Ergo, the sun would be an equal distance above the equator.

Using observable data I've demonstrated that the sun is 3,000 miles away on the Flat Earth model.

Are you able to demonstrate for us that the sun is actually 93,000,000 miles away? I'd like to see something which calculates the sun to be 93,000,000 miles away.

If you REers cannot do that then what reason is there to believe that the sun is 93,000,000 miles away?

That assumes that the world is flat. There probably is some proof that the sun is actually 93,000,000 miles away, but I can't be bothered to think about it

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #28 on: January 13, 2008, 05:17:47 PM »
Quote
That assumes that the world is flat.

It is.

Quote
There probably is some proof that the sun is actually 93,000,000 miles away, but I can't be bothered to think about it.

So since you don't have any proof, you expect us to blindly believe you?

?

The Terror

  • 1776
  • Flat Earth Propane Tank
Re: The Dealy Sun
« Reply #29 on: January 13, 2008, 05:22:48 PM »
your proof for supporting the idea that the sun is 3000 miles away assumes that the world is flat, yet you've dismissed proof that the sun is really far away because it assumes that the world is round. That's a bit hypocritical.

Yeah you should blindly follow me, cos I'm a captain and you're not.