If the earth is flat explain this to me Part 1

I want to start off with I believe that this whole forum is a hoax and that I think some kids probably in college are doing this for fun but I still want to jump in so with that said....
Hi,
New here, so I thought I would throw out some questions about your ideas that completely contradict what I see and do every day at job. My job consists of analyzing how the sun (solar wind) interacts with the earth’s atmosphere (and magnetosphere).  To do my job I have a decent idea of the earth’s magnetic field and how it interacts with the suns particles (which have a + or – charge).  Now I’m sorta going off subject here…I have so many questions so it’s hard. I was always told KISS which means keep it simple stupid...
Now I drew some stuff on paint so don’t take these drawings as exact measurements.
First here is the RE global equator and the axis which we believe it spins on that gets drawn on maps and globes for 1st graders to look at.
Fig 1-1



#1 would be our Axis which we believe the earth spins around.
#2 is the equator we all love and cherish.

Now for Fig 1-2
 


This here is a drawing of the magnetic equator and the magnetic axis (not to scale).  Now the magnetic axis is actually off set about 700 miles away from the global axis and because of that the ( I am going to make it really basic) the lower portions of the magnetosphere are actually closer to south America than they are anywhere else on earth which causes the magnetic equator to bend like on the picture.  There is proof of this also and it has to do with UHF communications ( google equatorial scintillation) .
I’m sure most of us know that UHF communications is done by bouncing a high frequency beam off a layer of the atmosphere. This layer isn’t always present especially at night… why!? Well because when the sun is overhead thanks to things i am not going to explain (google UHF communication), it becomes reinforced during the day. At night sometimes this layer weakens and even goes away which is bad for UHF com. Now you might be asking well what does this have to do with the magnetic equator and axis…? It has a lot to do with it. These changes are most drastic along the equator; there are sensors that constantly test this “layer” to see its strength. Also there are people that use this frequency for communication who notice this degradation along the equator and after many years and testing the fact is: this occurs on the magnetic equator and does that sweet bendy thing, all this because the earths magnetic field is closer to south America than anywhere else.
I am still on the same subject here… I remember read in another thread that the reason earth was magnetic is because of magnetic rocks or whatever in the middle… sure ok whatever.

Fig 1-3



Yay flat earth, with a flat earth equator and a flat earth axis (I guess).

Fig 1-4



Flat earth with the magnetic equator and magnetic axis. So I made this work by placing the magnetic axis off to the side.
Fig 1-5



Here is the best way for me to explain the South Atlantic anomaly with the flat earth theory. The other band of the magnetic field is closer to one side than the other which would cause a bend in the magnetic equator. So hey it works!!! Well I spent all this time explaining this, the magnetic equator you can even use this to explain why a compass points north. After all this we can conclude, I hope… that the flat earth magnetic field starts slightly off from the middle of the disc.
This now trashes the UHF degradation problem which is known to happen but this isn’t the point I want to make so I won’t talk about it unless someone would like for me to.
All this disproves the northern and southern lights because they have everything to do with the earth’s magnetic field. I will start off by explaining really quick why the northern lights happen on the north and south poles on a spherical earth.

Fig 2-1



Here is my MS paint helping explain the aurora. I’m not going to get all complex here if you want to know more just google it.
The sun emits particles, the particles hit the earths magnetosphere and go around to the poles where they don’t get blocked as much. These particles energize the atmosphere and you see lights. This is a fact millions of people see this all the time around the northern and southern poles. One quick thing northern and southern lights occur mostly during geomagnetic storming because of coronal holes on the sun, once again google if you want to know more.

On the flat earth theory this doesn't work here is why!
Fig 2-2



During times of geomagnetic storming we will get auroras (on the flat earth) in locations #1 AKA the arctic, and #3 AKA Antarctica. But this doesn’t work because  you can see the magnetosphere is blocking #3 which does not allow the suns particles to hit and charge the atmosphere causing those wonderful lights, but it would under the earth in location #2 which is sad because no one is there to see them other than Ice guards, klingons or whatever.

Fig 2-3



This here is still flat earth but I am putting the magnetic ends in different locations. This doesn’t work because then North would change depending on where you are located, what I mean by this is if you have a 50 cent compass north in south America would point in a different location than north in Australia, it would also cause the Northern lights to be in the wrong places 2-4.

Fig 2-4



The dashed lines would be the Aurora the dot in the middle would be the artic. we all know that the lights are seen on the poles. here we are seeing the lights in a different locations than are not consistent with what billions of witnesses see every time there is an aurora.
One of you FET people might say now that there are multiple magnetic fields... nope wrong again. a simple 50 cent compass will disprove that theory also.that means there would be a new north and south pole for every new dipole. see my drawing...

Fig 2-5



Each dot I made is a new dipole / magnetic field each "X" is a location where Timmy is standing with his 50 cent compass. That means that north will point in two different directions.
So here I am wondering why everything I do at my job makes sense with a spherical earth but when I put it against a flat earth it does not work. If you make it work one way then its doesn't work the other.
My challenge is prove to me that all this works with out some garbage theory you pull out of an Ice guards @$$. If you make one thing work make sure it all works... draw me pictures it only takes like 5 secs to do.

Now when you come up with your "theories" please back them up, this is my job and I know what I am talking about. If you want me to clarify anything let me know I wrote all this at the end of a night shift.
There will be a part 2 you dealing with terrestrial weather tomorrow.. can't wait!

edit: i had to fix a term i screwed up... my bad -Jones

I didn't know 50 Cent had his own line of orienteering equipment, I guess being gangsta is also highly important in the countryside.

tl:dr

Why is the equator not perpendicular to the axis of rotation?

i probably ment a 50 cent compass...

like i said the drawing arn't to scale but good call ill fix it. That doesn't disprove anything tho...

#1 would be our Axis which we believe the earth spins around.
#2 is the equator we all love and cherish.

Couldn't you just quickly fix this up, it's really annoying.

Fixed =),
 i typed this up really quick and made crappy drawings, if you see something screwed up let me know ill fix it. but for the record i made the drawings as a reference not as perfect accurate drawings.

Come on, i had a few FE people come and just say i screwed up a drawing, but no one has tried to explain any of my questions.
This is a BUMP

I don't think any of the hardcore FE'ers are on right now.

Your thoughts are incredibly scattered in your initial post. In so, I'm not sure how to start with your assumptions or even to address your questions.

A person believing in a round Earth awhile back developed a good visualization of how the field for FE would work just fine.

Think of a spool of thread standing on its side. The top flat portion is the part of the Earth where we reside, and the poles are, one at the top and one at the bottom of the spool. The lines radiate vertical from the North Pole and extend over the flat Earth before they curve back down at Antarctica.

Your thoughts are incredibly scattered in your initial post. In so, I'm not sure how to start with your assumptions or even to address your questions.

A person believing in a round Earth awhile back developed a good visualization of how the field for FE would work just fine.

Think of a spool of thread standing on its side. The top flat portion is the part of the Earth where we reside, and the poles are, one at the top and one at the bottom of the spool. The lines radiate vertical from the North Pole and extend over the flat Earth before they curve back down at Antarctica.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean im guessing this:


which looks alot like one of the figures i showed in my 1st post whice doesn't explain anything really, other than a compass would point north (artic) but what about everything else i talked about? And my thoughts weren't scattered. i just started off by trying to explain where the center of the dipole would have to be for the magnetic equator to work on a flat earth.

First of all, I just found this site yesterday and have been trying to work through it all.  I don't see a lot here but speculation.  Even the FAQ has things like, possible answer, theory and so on.  Anyway.  I have another question that might relate to this and will hopefully pull some FEers in here and get this ball rolling.  First I have been wondering about this ever since I found this site and can't figure out where the answer is on this forum, or where it's explained anywhere.  Ok, so, anyone who knows anything basic about how the magnetic field works and how a basic magnetic compass is drawn to the magnetic north pole knows that there are two balances of compasses sold in the world.  One balanced for north of the equator and one balanced for south of the equator.  In other words, if you buy a compass in north america and take it to brazil, it won't work.  The needle isn't balanced properly to find magnetic north.  The damn thing just points at the ground no matter what way you turn.  So tell me, in FET how this is possible.  I think that this guy might be trying to drag this explanation out of you guys too, but hopefully this will give you a different perspective to look at it.  It just seems to me that in FET that it wouldn't matter because the earth is on a somewhat flat plane.  Am I anywhere close to being clear on this question?  If this is totally not on your subject, let me know and I will get rid of this post.  This is just the first thing I have found that remotely comes close to my question.

Thanks, C-Ray

/Bump/

anyone? bump

I think this is the best representation of how the magnetic poles work in FE.


Althought there is a theory that the earth is not a disc, but an entire plane of existance. Not sure how the magnetic poles would work in that model. What are you thoughts on that?

And are you asking if there could be another explanation for the pretty lights in the sky at both poles? Because I dare say there could be.

sure go ahead... but if you guys make up some random thing make sure that it will back up everything else i talked about. Answering one question should also support all my other questions.

I wasn't saying I had any explanation for it. Just that lights in the sky doesn't seem like that hard of a thing to explain.

Ya it sorta is, With a dipole you have 2 open ends... these ends are where particles enter in to the earths atmosphere and excite molecules causing them to light up. With RET these area match up very well with where people see them. In 3 days there will be auroras due to Geo Mag storming which is forecasted to occur, Auroras will occur on the north and south pole.
With FET the open ends of the dipole are not in the right spots for where Millions of people witness the auroras several  times a year. In fact the outter portions of the disc where the Aurora gets seen is very well protected.

I understand what your theory behind the lights is, but if it is not related to the magnetic field of the earth at all, then any number of different theories could explain it.

I understand what your theory behind the lights is, but if it is not related to the magnetic field of the earth at all, then any number of different theories could explain it.

Thats the problem its not a theory... its a fact. But i wouldn't mind if you came up with some theorys so i could disprove them.

Can you prove to me that it is fact?

But if we're going to bandy ideas around, and I take at face value that the phenomenon observed at both poles is caused by the magnet poles, then how about if the ice wall surrounding Flat Earth is in fact the magnetic south pole. That would make the magnetic fields the same as you observe in Round Earth, would it not?

Can you prove to me that it is fact?

But if we're going to bandy ideas around, and I take at face value that the phenomenon observed at both poles is caused by the magnet poles, then how about if the ice wall surrounding Flat Earth is in fact the magnetic south pole. That would make the magnetic fields the same as you observe in Round Earth, would it not?

I guessing you dont understand Magnetic fields all that good, and im no expert. With a dipole (earth) you have one north and one south pole not one north and several south poles. From reading other threads it seems like most FE people say or seem to agree that earth is still a dipole.

But if your theory is correct, then that would disprove that there is just 1 south pole so I'm looking for an alternative theory.

But if your theory is correct, then that would disprove that there is just 1 south pole so I'm looking for an alternative theory.

So you are saying if an RE fact somehow disproves a FE idea (I wont even call them theories anymore), you have to make a new one up?? How about your wrong? That's retarded... seems like those retarded religions that would kill people because they had a different idea than what was written in a retarded book 1500 years before in Europe... can't remember what it was called, started with a C.

re•tard   
–verb (used with object)
1. to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede. 
–verb (used without object)

-Kind of like how the church retarded human development a couple hundred years ago.

2. to be delayed.  –noun

-So if my plane gets delayed at the airport is has also be retarded...I hate retarded airplanes.

3. a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine. 

-Huh machines can also be retarded...sweet.

4. Slang: Disparaging. a. a mentally retarded person. 

-Nothing against these people other than they seem very greedy taking this word all for themselves, so many other meanings, but once the word is said it has to automatically mean an insult to the mentally handicap... they seem like assholes to me if this is the case.

b. a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard. 
 
-I guess you don't have to be mentally handicap you be a retard...this is you Fletch (B).

5. Automotive, Machinery. an adjustment made in the setting of the distributor of an internal-combustion engine so that the spark for ignition in each cylinder is generated later in the cycle. 

-stupid mechanics retarding their engines... mechanics and lawyers I have them both now.

Quote from: Fletch on August 17, 2008, 01:40:38 AM

But if your theory is correct, then that would disprove that there is just 1 south pole so I'm looking for an alternative theory.

So you are saying if an RE fact somehow disproves a FE idea (I wont even call them theories anymore), you have to make a new one up??

Isn't that that how theories work? You make a supposition to see if it fits the data, and if not you adjust it.

I thought you wanted to debate but I see that you actually just want to make fun of people. My mistake.

Quote from: spacemanjones on August 17, 2008, 05:18:13 AM

Quote from: Fletch on August 17, 2008, 01:40:38 AM

But if your theory is correct, then that would disprove that there is just 1 south pole so I'm looking for an alternative theory.

So you are saying if an RE fact somehow disproves a FE idea (I wont even call them theories anymore), you have to make a new one up??

Isn't that that how theories work? You make a supposition to see if it fits the data, and if not you adjust it.

I thought you wanted to debate but I see that you actually just want to make fun of people. My mistake.

thats the problem your theories only fit in one thing if that the rest of the details they fail at explaining. If you have a new theory please explain it. Dont just say "What if..." and leave it at that.

Quote from: Fletch on August 16, 2008, 09:13:36 PM

But if we're going to bandy ideas around, and I take at face value that the phenomenon observed at both poles is caused by the magnet poles, then how about if the ice wall surrounding Flat Earth is in fact the magnetic south pole. That would make the magnetic fields the same as you observe in Round Earth, would it not?

You don't understand Mag Fields at all by asking this question... being that im not an expert, I have a hard time of putting words together because your questions is so wrong. give me time and ill think of a way of putting it or drawing it out.

Also this is my day off and on my days off I have other things to do so I would rather not spend an hour or two drawing something out. I will give you an answer and im sure you will have another silly question. If you don't mind google stuff about magnets, dipoles and stuff like that you might answer your own question.

One quick thing is that there has to be a closed loop between the mag fields. with the + going to the - (outer icewall) thats leaves the other portion of the - open which it would need to close. for it to close it would have to go to the + wich is the open in of the other mag field (other part of the ice wall) which would give you this poicture again:

Also this is my day off and on my days off I have other things to do so I would rather not spend an hour or two drawing something out.

Sure you would.

It seems to me that a magnet can be any shape. A cone, for example, with the North Pole at the point, and the south pole at the base. So how about if the cone was hollowed out? And then how about if the cone was squashed down so it was pretty flat, but raised slightly at the point (North Pole) and the outer ring (South Pole/Ice Wall)?