Geothermic Heat, Seasons, The Edge, etc.

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)
2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?
3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?
4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195 BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

Keep in mind, I'm answering based on my model.

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)

The infinite flat earth is around 9000km

2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?

The Middle layer.

3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?

There is no edge

4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

See the faq

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

Read the faq

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195(?) BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

He made the assumption the earth is round and he made the assumption that the stars were far away.  His experiment proves nothing on the shape of the earth since it assumes the shape of the earth.

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

I believe this happens due to aetheric 'refraction'.

Keep in mind, I'm answering based on my model.

Quote from: ehal256 on January 17, 2008, 07:40:58 PM

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)

The infinite flat earth is around 9000km

Quote

2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?

The Middle layer.

Quote

3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?

There is no edge

Quote

4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

See the faq

Quote

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

Read the faq

Quote

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195(?) BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

He made the assumption the earth is round and he made the assumption that the stars were far away.  His experiment proves nothing on the shape of the earth since it assumes the shape of the earth.

Quote

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

I believe this happens due to aetheric 'refraction'.

It just keeps on going forever and ever? where is this infinite land? what imposibly huge and yet unknown organization is hiding something which cannot be hid?  btw, the FAQ seems to be just a bunch of random excuses come up from whatever the writer had i his mind at the time during which the question was posed.   You're trying to make me believe that for the entire written history of humans, no one has any record of what you're trying to say (infinite land)

Quote from: Username on January 17, 2008, 07:55:49 PM

Keep in mind, I'm answering based on my model.

Quote from: ehal256 on January 17, 2008, 07:40:58 PM

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)

The infinite flat earth is around 9000km

Quote

2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?

The Middle layer.

Quote

3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?

There is no edge

Quote

4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

See the faq

Quote

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

Read the faq

Quote

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195(?) BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

He made the assumption the earth is round and he made the assumption that the stars were far away.  His experiment proves nothing on the shape of the earth since it assumes the shape of the earth.

Quote

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

I believe this happens due to aetheric 'refraction'.

It just keeps on going forever and ever? where is this infinite land? what imposibly huge and yet unknown organization is hiding something which cannot be hid?  btw, the FAQ seems to be just a bunch of random excuses come up from whatever the writer had i his mind at the time during which the question was posed.   You're trying to make me believe that for the entire written history of humans, no one has any record of what you're trying to say (infinite land)

Antarctica was only discovered in the 1800s and not explored to any depth til the 20th century.

Ahh what the hell I'm game.. need to blow off some steam anyway right? Here we go!

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)

Who knows and who cares? What does it matter? As far as anyone here knows, the best maths work out to around 9,000km I believe. Username would be the one to ask that question to.

2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?

Same place it comes from on any other planet that creates geothermic heat... you know... lava, friction from plate movements, planetary core... things like that... why would it be different for a flat Earth?

3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?

Ever seen any pictures of Antartica? Visualise that in your head... See the really high walls of ice? Ok.. now put that all the way around the Earth... there's that picture of the edge of the earth and what the "edge" looks like.

4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

Let's see... sun goes around the planet... moves back and forth or "north and south" which in turn causes the exact same thing you see and experience every year. Sun moves a bit in the sky... you get hotter or colder results overall eh?

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

Do a search in these forums for something called the "shadow object" I don't even know how that one works. However if you had some sort of cometary body that intersected between the earth and the sun in corrospondence with the eclipses... yoou'd get the same result eh?

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195(?) BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

Is that so? Well let's see here... if I set up a spotlight and hang it from the top of a tree... and can't really tell how high it is. Then measure the angles at which I see the light at various distances on the ground... how would I know which is changing according to your theory? The location of the light? Or the level of the ground upon which I stand?

What was the reference he used for absolute noon in all three locations back then? There are so many variables it boggles the mind.

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

How so? If you look up at the night sky and look south lets say... how far can you see before the atmosphere meets the horizon and it's all a bunch of muck? It's the same thing... you've gotta travel before you can see the northern stars and when you look behind you after you get there... *gasp!* no more southern stars! OH NO!


Look, I'm in a pissy mood, I don't truly believe that the earth is flat, but the point is... anything is possible and it's obvious that although you and I and many people may think we have it all figured out.. it's pretty darn easy to start unraveling the rope a braid at a time until it all starts fraying out into the same basic theories.

It's obvious the earth isn't infinite. That's complete bollocks. If the earth was infinite, it would require infinite energy to constantly accelerate it, and that is not possible.

Yes, I know, the FEr's have absolutely no common ground with us guys, which means a rational argument can't even take place, and absolutely no self-consistency between arguments (or at least, not very much).

It's obvious the earth isn't infinite. That's complete bollocks. If the earth was infinite, it would require infinite energy to constantly accelerate it, and that is not possible.

The infinite earth is not being accelerated.

it would however require an infinite amount of energy to be held together, and not fall apart.

it would however require an infinite amount of energy to be held together, and not fall apart.

Gravitation holds it together...

but for a force hold it together would require an infinite amount of energy, am i wrong?

Anyways, gravity, at least the gravitational force that I know, is FAR too weak to hold it together.

Quote from: Pabes1 on January 17, 2008, 08:17:56 PM

It's obvious the earth isn't infinite. That's complete bollocks. If the earth was infinite, it would require infinite energy to constantly accelerate it, and that is not possible.

The infinite earth is not being accelerated.

so it isn't orbiting around the sun either? lol

but for a force hold it together would require an infinite amount of energy, am i wrong?

Gravity is not a force, it is a fictitious force.  It doesn't require energy.

Anyways, gravity, at least the gravitational force that I know, is FAR too weak to hold it together.

How do you think the Round Earth is held together then?

so it isn't orbiting around the sun either? lol

Nope.

"Anyways, gravity, at least the gravitational force that I know, is FAR too weak to hold it together.
How do you think the Round Earth is held together then?"

I guess I got mixed up, i was thinking of something else :/

"Anyways, gravity, at least the gravitational force that I know, is FAR too weak to hold it together.
How do you think the Round Earth is held together then?"

I guess I got mixed up, i was thinking of something else :/

np

wait, but doesnt emf hold everything together, along with the strong nuclear force?  once again, i could be getting mixed up lol. 

"Gravitation holds it together..."
"Gravity is not a force, it is a fictitious force.  It doesn't require energy."

?

wait, but doesnt emf hold everything together, along with the strong nuclear force?  once again, i could be getting mixed up lol. 

emf holds things together at the atom/molecule level.  Gravitation on the larger level.

"Gravitation holds it together..."
"Gravity is not a force, it is a fictitious force.  It doesn't require energy."

?

Gravitation is not a force. 

Here is a quick primer:
I'm going to give a brief overview of Einstein's Relativity in simple non-mathematical layman's terms.

Light

Light is a massless particle with a constant speed to all observers.  It has momentum.  It acts as both a wave and a particle.

To explain the problem prior to Einstein's work with light speed I will use a simple example.  Lets say Alice is standing 1000 feet away from a light source, and Bob is moving at 10ft/sec towards the light source.  Both of them can detect the speed of things, because they are just cool kids.  Common sense tells us that light will be observed by Alice to be light speed, and light will be observed by Bob to be light speed ( c ) - 10ft/sec.  However, they both observe light speed to be the same ( c ).  This seems like a paradox of sorts, but Einstein shows us how this works, among other things. 

The faster things travel the more massive to an outside observer they get.  Furthermore the faster they travel, the slower time seems to be passing to the object compared to an outside side observer.  This is known as time dilation.  As things approach the speed of light, they get more massive (and thus harder to accelerate) and seem to be passing slower to outside observers.  Since to reach the speed of light their mass would need to reach infinite mass, they cannot break this barrier.

This time dilation is what makes the speed of light constant.  Even though Bob is moving faster towards light than Alice, time dilates and he measures the speed the same.

Gravity

Gravity also dilates time.  In fact, Einstein says that Gravity (or more accurately, gravitation) is equivalent to acceleration locally.  That is to say, if you are in a closed box and feel something pulling you down there is no way to tell if you are accelerating upwards (as in an elevator) or if you are being pulled down by gravitation.

Heres where it gets messy.   Remember time dilation?  Well, lets look back at Alice and Bob to expand on that a bit.

Lets say Alice and Bob are in the middle of space with no stars, gravitation, or any place marks to tell ones position.  Bob starts moving away from Alice at a constant speed.  However, from Bobs frame of reference, he is not moving at all, and it is Alice that is moving away!  So, to bring it together, since Alice is moving faster than Bob from his Frame Of Reference, Alice actually has her time moving slower and she is more massive!  It is also true that from Alice's Frame of Reference Bob is slower and more massive.  This may again seem like a paradox, but it is not.

So what does this all have to do with gravitation?  I promise, all of this will come together at the end.

Back to the Equivalence Principle – you know, that says that gravitation is the same as acceleration.  Lets say you are in a closed box moving a constant speed.  This is known as an inertial frame of reference.  Now, lets say you are in a closed box accelerating upwards at the rate of 1g (about how fast you accelerate to the earth if you jump.)  This is known as a non-inertial frame of reference.  This is because you are being acted upon by a force that is unexplained by what you know.  In reality though, this is not a “force” at all.  It is actually what is known as a pseudo-force.  Here is how wikipedia explains it:

“When a car accelerates hard, the common human response is to feel "pushed back into the seat." In an inertial frame of reference attached to the road, there is no physical force moving the rider backward. However, in the rider's non-inertial reference frame attached to the accelerating car, there is a backward fictitious force.”

Now here is the kicker.  Einstein says gravity is a pseudo-force caused by taking a non-inertial frame of reference to be an inertial one.  That is to say, we think that its a force acting on us, but really we are just accelerating through space.

Now why would we accelerate for no reason towards mass?  This is most likely the most often explained part of Relativity as it relates to gravitation.  Energy distorts space time, much like a bowling bowl would distort a taught sheet.  Remember, energy is mass! (E=mc^2). This is why accelerating also distorts space-time!  In mathematical terms, the space is no longer flat (or Euclidean) but is now non-euclidean.  This means two objects traveling parallel to each other may not end up being parallel further along the line and may even eventually hit each other.   Straight lines are no longer “straight” but follow these distortions in space time.  When objects follow these “non-straight” straight lines, they are said to follow their geodesics.

An important consequence of this is that you don't need mass to be affected by gravitation.  You simply need momentum – to keep on traveling in a straight line.

So there we have it, Gravity is not a real force according to Relativity.

[Someone please read over this, I'm sure I have made mistakes]

yes, now that i read that, i remember i have heard of the udea that gravity isn't a force, i just forgot about it.
but how do you explain a ball falling when you drop it? the earth is getting larger? the planet happens to be moving in the direction that you drop the ball?  I don't mean to be rude, I just don't understand how it works in every situation.

yes, now that i read that, i remember i have heard of the udea that gravity isn't a force, i just forgot about it.
but how do you explain a ball falling when you drop it? the earth is getting larger? the planet happens to be moving in the direction that you drop the ball?  I don't mean to be rude, I just don't understand how it works in every situation.

According to UA, the earth rushes up to the ball.

However, in RE and in the infinite earth its just following its geodesic.

going to sleep. ciao

ok, night.

you guys do know that you're basically calling my friend a liar, because he's an aerospace engineer that does work on satellites?

just part of the conspiracy i'm assuming.

1) How thick is the earth? (if it's flat, that is)

Quite.

2) If it's flat, where does geothermic heat, for example, a geyser, and hot springs, come from?  On earth, it comes from the heat of the earth's core?

There is lava a few layers down.

3) Where is the edge? What does it look like? Are there any pictures of it?

The edge is around the outer area, it looks like the edge, there are pictures of it... sketched.

4) Explain how seasons work with a flat earth.

Sun spins around the sky in different orbital radius' depending on the time of year.

5)  During lunar eclipses, the shadow of the earth on the moon is
always round.  If the earth were flat, then this projection will not always
be circular (it could turn to a line!).  But this has never been observed,
regardless of the time of the lunar eclipse.

That's not the earth causing the shadow, it's supposedly the shadow object

6)  Eratosthanes (276-195 BCE) did a famous experiment on measuring the
angle of the sun at noon in Alexandria, Egypt, and in Syrene.  Finding the
difference in the angles and knowing the distance between the two points,
the circumference can be calculated.  He calculated the circumference in
stadia, which we do not know the conversion to our present day measure, but it's easy to go out somewhere and disprove your own theory, if you want.

It won't.

7)If you travel north or south a significant distance, you will see a
different set of stars at night.  This cannot happen on a flat surface.

The stars may have a hologramatic effect, it entirely depends on who's model of FE we're talking about.

you guys do know that you're basically calling my friend a liar, because he's an aerospace engineer that does work on satellites?

just part of the conspiracy i'm assuming.

We call many people liars.  However, we know that they are in the wrong and we are in the right because we know the earth is flat.

Quote from: ehal256 on January 17, 2008, 10:44:19 PM

you guys do know that you're basically calling my friend a liar, because he's an aerospace engineer that does work on satellites?

just part of the conspiracy i'm assuming.

We call many people liars.  However, we know that they are in the wrong and we are in the right because we know the earth is flat.

you're a liar

You're all just a bunch of friggin' nutball loonytoons... so I don't think you're liars. Just nuts. I still love all of you though. Even Tom sometimes because he is still a Python script and I really can't hate something that took that much time and care to create for very long.

- Optimus

Quote from: The Great God Roundy on January 18, 2008, 02:50:03 AM

Quote from: ehal256 on January 17, 2008, 10:44:19 PM

you guys do know that you're basically calling my friend a liar, because he's an aerospace engineer that does work on satellites?

just part of the conspiracy i'm assuming.

We call many people liars.  However, we know that they are in the wrong and we are in the right because we know the earth is flat.

you're a liar

NO U