Why does the FE Sun travel in a curve?

I couldn't find it in the FAQ.

As I understand the theory, the FE model's Sun travels in a circular path around the disk, equidistant from the Central North Pole and the Outer ice wall.

Why would an object that is not affected by any external forces travel in a circular path?

You've gotten no answer because in order to answer your question, they'd have to admit they're wrong. And they're too ignorant and proud to do something like that.

Awfully quick to judge aren't we? You haven't gotten an answer because they have answered this question before, at least somewhat. Use the search function and you should be able to find at least one of their answers.

Wrong. Nobody supporting FE has EVER provided any solid evidence to back their claim. They blame it all on a conspiracy, which is why nobody knows anything about it. If it were real, why would anybody need to cover it up?

We are talking about why the sun travels in a curve here, nothing else. I was simply answering his question. However your question has been answered numerous times as well.

Regardless of *how* the sun travels, in a flat earth, either the entire planet is lit or it isn't. Simple math, which you people seem to love so dearly, will demonstrate that.

Somebody please use math to explain to me how any light-producing object can illuminate nothing but a wedge of a plane.

I wouldn't really say it's math but OK. Anyway, as an REer, what I understand is that the sun doesn't act like our sun, but it acts like a spotlight, and therfore only illuminates part of the Earth at once.

So what powers said spotlight? Who's manning the controls? What contains the light so it only points in a certain way?

Who knows? God maybe? Probably the same being who started the Big Bang in RE, the same being that set the planets in their orbit and made sure that they don't run into each other.

Except that Big Bang could have also been the result of two membrane universes (see: M-theory) colliding.

*awaits counter-evidence*

The point is that there are some unexplainable things in both theories, sometimes you can't provide evidence for everything.

Except that there's nothing about round-earth that we haven't already proven. You just refuse to accept terabytes' worth of data as proof.

Proof or not, it's a hell of a lot more conclusive than FE theory.

I do accept the evidence, I'm an REer, I'm just trying to help you to understand a little better that FET holds more water than you give it credit for.

I do accept the evidence, I'm an REer, I'm just trying to help you to understand a little better that FET holds more water than you give it credit for.

It holds no "water". 

It's a figure of speech.

It's a figure of speech.

I know.  The FET has no credibility. 

Oh, I wasn't sure if you were meaning literally or not.

Oh, I wasn't sure if you were meaning literally or not.

I put water in quotation marks because I wouldn't normally say that.

Except that there's nothing about round-earth that we haven't already proven. You just refuse to accept terabytes' worth of data as proof.

Proof or not, it's a hell of a lot more conclusive than FE theory.

With words like "terabyte" how could you be wrong?
How do you quantize terabytes, when RE's most significant publications were not digitized?

Aside from your obvious buzzwording, here's why you're an idiot:

Except that there's nothing about round-earth that we haven't already proven.

I'm sorry, but are you serious? Prove gravity is a function of mass.

How do you quantize terabytes, when RE's most significant publications were not digitized?

You won't have to buy any books. They are digitized and online. Check my signature link.

Oops!

Anyway, FYI http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-terabyte.htm , not a buzzword, just measure of memory/storage.

I'm sure the Gutenberg project would be interested if there are any hidden gems that aren't online yet.

BTW, sorry for neglegting my thread. I had to go visit the real world for a while and was reluctant to post from outside my daytime firewalled proxy fortress.

Anyway, back on track.

I have searched these forums as suggested by Physics101 and found little to explain my original question.

The three vague offerings that I turned up were:

1. The Sun and Moon orbit opposite each other, therefore pulling each other in a circular path.

2. There is a quantity of Dark Energy/Dark Matter sat over the north pole that influences the Sun's path.

3. The Sun remains stationary above a rotating disc.

So which is it?

Quite probably all three to some extent.

All Three?

The first requires a gravitational-like force between the Sun and Moon which doesn't exist in FE theory.

The second implies that the DE/DM only affects the Sun/ Moon and no other object.

The third requires that the UA holds the Sun/Moon in stationary position above the rotating disk. Yet all other unsupported objects will 'fall' to the disc due to the upward acceleration.

Do three wrongs make a right?

After some discussion in another thread and consultation of the PEST details posted by Dogplatter, the questions here are explained. All be it in a way that I don't understand, but a theory that supports giant metal balls in the sky does address the above problems.

Thank the Noodly one, RAMEN!

Just to complicate things further, if I understand what I've read on this site then the changes in season are caused by the sun moving periodically along the radius from the central north pole. To do this would require a mechanism and energy? If the sun is stationary with the earth disk rotating underneath it about the north pole then that is all that is required to explain this behaviour. If however you consider that the earth is fixed and it is the sun that moves, then in order to maintain a 24 hour rotation period, it must speed up as it moves out towards the rim and slow down as it moves back toward the north pole. Again, it would appear that a mechanism and energy is required for this to happen?

Quote from: narcberry on August 05, 2008, 07:36:18 PM

How do you quantize terabytes, when RE's most significant publications were not digitized?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on August 05, 2008, 05:47:10 PM

You won't have to buy any books. They are digitized and online. Check my signature link.

Oops!

Anyway, FYI http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-terabyte.htm , not a buzzword, just measure of memory/storage.

I'm sure the Gutenberg project would be interested if there are any hidden gems that aren't online yet.

BTW, sorry for neglegting my thread. I had to go visit the real world for a while and was reluctant to post from outside my daytime firewalled proxy fortress.

Anyway, back on track.

I have searched these forums as suggested by Physics101 and found little to explain my original question.

The three vague offerings that I turned up were:

1. The Sun and Moon orbit opposite each other, therefore pulling each other in a circular path.

2. There is a quantity of Dark Energy/Dark Matter sat over the north pole that influences the Sun's path.

3. The Sun remains stationary above a rotating disc.

So which is it?

Terabyte was a buzzword. Despite the fact that it can be used objectively, you have no idea the amount of digital space consumed by RE theory. You threw it out there because it's the biggest digital volume you know, and only tells us two things. 1) You're a crappy nerd (just started your first computer class at your local community college?), 2) you are talking out of your ass.

Start looking at the earth simulator and that alone consumes several dozen terabytes of raw data per second. Yet the amount of data it consumes is in no way proof the earth is round.

I could easily write a data generating algorithm for FET, which only looks at the earth's acceleration upwards, and generates an uncountably infinite amount of data. Does that mean the earth is flat?

Google Earth (earth simulator) is only 22.5 MB. Currently, there is almost nothing that takes up terabytes, other than programs that super computers use.

The earth simulator is a super computer in japan. And many systems consume terabytes or more.
Congrats on being an idiot. Again.

1) You're a crappy nerd (just started your first computer class at your local community college

Actually, I manage a SAN with 12 Servers and 16Tb of data (RAID 15, Fibre Channel SCSI managed by a Dell CX600 if you're interested.) Around 2500 users depend on me knowing what I'm doing.

But nice try.

OK - so you managed to get a job.

Don't be jealous. You'll get one too some day.

Maybe.