Looking for an intelligent argument. (Terminal Velocity)

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth. 

Making false assertions does not constitute evidence.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:33:03 AM

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth. 

Making false assertions does not constitute evidence.

To bad it's not false.

To bad it's not false.

Making true assertions does not constitute evidence, either. So your response was inadequate either way.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:40:22 AM

To bad it's not false.

Making true assertions does not constitute evidence, either. So your response was inadequate either way.

I have already proved me point.  You just have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just like another Divito.  You only know what you have read or stolen, but you go the extra distance to make stuff up.    See your new gravitation thread in AS. 

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 03:40:02 AM

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

1. Gravitation is acceleration.
2. The term 'free fall' by definition removes any possibility of the object in question accelerating.

I have already proved me point.  You just have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just like another Divito.  You only know what you have read or stolen, but you go the extra distance to make stuff up.    See your new gravitation thread in AS. 

I see you are not to be removed from your Newtonian comfort zone. Very well then, I can attempt to reason with you no further.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:33:03 AM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 03:40:02 AM

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

1. Gravitation is acceleration.
2. The term 'free fall' by definition removes any possibility of the object in question accelerating.

GRAVITATION IS NOT ACCELERATION.  SEARCH FOR THAT TERM AND SEE HOW MANY RESULTS YOU GET.  I already know from the last time they tried to argue that.  You will get around 4 results. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:47:49 AM

I have already proved me point.  You just have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just like another Divito.  You only know what you have read or stolen, but you go the extra distance to make stuff up.    See your new gravitation thread in AS. 

I see you are not to be removed from your Newtonian comfort zone. Very well then, I can attempt to reason with you no further.

I pick the FOR of the earth, o look, objects accelerate towards me.  According to you this is impossible, but a last you are wrong. 

I have already proved me point.  You just have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just like another Divito.  You only know what you have read or stolen, but you go the extra distance to make stuff up.    See your new gravitation thread in AS. 

1. How is knowing what I've read any different than being taught the information? This also ignores the information I've also been taught.
2. How does one steal public information?
3. Name something I've made up; you've made up more things than I have.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:47:49 AM

I have already proved me point.  You just have no idea what you are talking about.  You are just like another Divito.  You only know what you have read or stolen, but you go the extra distance to make stuff up.    See your new gravitation thread in AS. 

1. How is knowing what I've read any different than being taught the information? This also ignores the information I've also been taught.
2. How does one steal public information?
3. Name something I've made up; you've made up more things than I have.

1. Some teachers teach more than just what books say.
2. Plagiarism 
3.  I was getting that robosteve goes the extra distance to make stuff up, not you. 

I pick the FOR of the earth, o look, objects accelerate towards me.  According to you this is impossible, but a last you are wrong. 

Congratulations on picking a non-inertial frame of reference. You do know that one of the features of a non-inertial frame of reference is a fictitious force, don't you? I wonder what force you might have invented to compensate for the effect of your acceleration?

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:54:55 AM

I pick the FOR of the earth, o look, objects accelerate towards me.  According to you this is impossible, but a last you are wrong. 

Congratulations on picking a non-inertial frame of reference. You do know that one of the features of a non-inertial frame of reference is a fictitious force, don't you? I wonder what force you might have invented to compensate for the effect of your acceleration?

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 07:51:40 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:33:03 AM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 03:40:02 AM

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

1. Gravitation is acceleration.
2. The term 'free fall' by definition removes any possibility of the object in question accelerating.

GRAVITATION IS NOT ACCELERATION.  SEARCH FOR THAT TERM AND SEE HOW MANY RESULTS YOU GET.  I already know from the last time they tried to argue that.  You will get around 4 results.

I realise that my first point was a little ambiguous, I was perhaps a little too hasty in posting, but I notice that you seem to be having serious problems responding to my second point.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:54:55 AM

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 07:51:40 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:33:03 AM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 03:40:02 AM

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

1. Gravitation is acceleration.
2. The term 'free fall' by definition removes any possibility of the object in question accelerating.

GRAVITATION IS NOT ACCELERATION.  SEARCH FOR THAT TERM AND SEE HOW MANY RESULTS YOU GET.  I already know from the last time they tried to argue that.  You will get around 4 results.

I realise that my first point was a little ambiguous, I was perhaps a little to hasty in posting, but I notice that you seem to be having serious problems responding to my second point.

umm, I agree free falling objects accelerate towards the earth. 

1. Some teachers teach more than just what books say.

And how do those teachers compare to several books, other teachers, and online sources?

2. Plagiarism

Communicating information that you've learned/"know" does not constitute plagiarism.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:01:20 AM

1. Some teachers teach more than just what books say.

And how do those teachers compare to several books, other teachers, and online sources?

Usually pretty well as they have doctorates and conduct research while they teach. 

Communicating information that you've learned/"know" does not constitute plagiarism.

Yes, but stealing it and claiming it as your own does. 

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

Usually pretty well as they have doctorates and conduct research while they teach. 

Oh, so the doctorates and other achievements of the book-writers, the other teachers, and those of the online sources don't count?

Yes, but stealing it and claiming it as your own does. 

Besides the illogical nature of the question, what information have I claimed as my own?

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 08:07:12 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:54:55 AM

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 07:51:40 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 07:33:03 AM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 03:40:02 AM

No. You are the one arguing the affirmative side; it is up to you to post evidence.

I have already told you: 
1. Gravitation causes acceleration.
2. A free falling object can accelerate towards the earth.
 

1. Gravitation is acceleration.
2. The term 'free fall' by definition removes any possibility of the object in question accelerating.

GRAVITATION IS NOT ACCELERATION.  SEARCH FOR THAT TERM AND SEE HOW MANY RESULTS YOU GET.  I already know from the last time they tried to argue that.  You will get around 4 results.

I realise that my first point was a little ambiguous, I was perhaps a little to hasty in posting, but I notice that you seem to be having serious problems responding to my second point.

umm, I agree free falling objects accelerate towards the earth. 

That isn't what I said, I said the the term 'free fall' has nothing to do with acceleration, and that the object that is 'free falling' is not accelerating at all.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:05:50 AM

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

To expand further, I shall assume that by "the frame of reference of the Earth" you mean "the frame of reference of the centre of mass of the Earth", as the Earth itself is not in a single frame of reference.

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:05:50 AM

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

Gravitation causes objects to accelerate towards the earth.  End of story. 

That isn't what I said, I said the the term 'free fall' has nothing to do with acceleration, and that the object that is 'free falling' is not accelerating at all.

 

Apparently I wasn't paying attention.

Does this help? 

Free fall is motion with no acceleration other than that provided by gravity.

You can change gravity to gravitation. 

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 08:13:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:05:50 AM

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

To expand further, I shall assume that by "the frame of reference of the Earth" you mean "the frame of reference of the centre of mass of the Earth", as the Earth itself is not in a single frame of reference.

I am talking about the whole earth.  There is a FOR that is the whole earth. 

Gravitation causes objects to accelerate towards the earth.  End of story.

You are really beginning to irritate me. You cannot simply make that assertion and expect people to accept it without providing any evidence.

I am talking about the whole earth.  There is a FOR that is the whole earth. 

No there isn't. The surface of the Earth at one end is accelerating at 9.8 m s^-2 in one direction, and on the other side it is accelerating at the same rate in the opposite direction. These are not the same frame of reference, and they are both non-inertial in any case. The only inertial frame of reference that fits what you are trying to describe is that of the Earth's centre of mass.

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 08:13:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:05:50 AM

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

Gravitation causes objects to accelerate towards the earth.  End of story. 

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 08:15:51 AM

That isn't what I said, I said the the term 'free fall' has nothing to do with acceleration, and that the object that is 'free falling' is not accelerating at all.

 

Apparently I wasn't paying attention.

Does this help? 

Quote from: wiki

Free fall is motion with no acceleration other than that provided by gravity.

You can change gravity to gravitation. 

No. Gravity is not gravitation.

Quote from: Robosteve on August 18, 2008, 08:13:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 18, 2008, 08:05:50 AM

I'm sorry, please use your brain before you speak.  Why is the earth a non inertial FOR?

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant the frame of reference as you stand on the Earth; I was lead astray by your use of the first person.

To correct said misinterpretation, things don't accelerate towards you.

Gravitation causes objects to accelerate towards the earth.  End of story. 

Quote from: Crudblud on August 18, 2008, 08:15:51 AM

That isn't what I said, I said the the term 'free fall' has nothing to do with acceleration, and that the object that is 'free falling' is not accelerating at all.

 

Apparently I wasn't paying attention.

Does this help? 

Quote from: wiki

Free fall is motion with no acceleration other than that provided by gravity.

You can change gravity to gravitation. 

sokarul, I have discovered a site you may find useful:


www.rif.org

I think the FE's are the conspirators,  How  much money do you guys make off of this farse?  Who is selling the books and making money off of this?   

I think the FE's are the conspirators,  How  much money do you guys make off of this farse?  Who is selling the books and making money off of this?   

As far as I know, no-one here is making any money through this site or the theories espoused here. There are no ads here, and no one here is selling anything.


Unlike NASA and the other globu-cronies you RE'ers are so in love with, we're not in it for the money.

How come your administrator is promoting a book right on your home page?  Maybe you should as Danial?


News: The Flat Earth Society forums are back up!  I apologise for the downtime.  The problem has been resolved and won't happen again.  Also, the FES will be opening for official membership (complete with certificates and individually-numbered medals!) in the next few weeks.  Stay tuned!         

    Home    Help  Search  Profile  My Messages  Members  Logout   

theflatearthsociety.org > Flat Earth Discussion > Flat Earth Debate & Discussion > New Flat Earth book being released!
Pages: [1]  « previous next »
  Notify  |  Mark unread  |  Send this topic  |  Print   
 
  Author Topic: New Flat Earth book being released!  (Read 3682 times) 

Daniel
Administrator

Posts: 311


 
      New Flat Earth book being released!
« on: April 13, 2007, 07:35:31 AM » 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been in contact with an author named Christine Garwood for the past couple of years because she's been working on a book about the history of the Flat Earth concept and the people connected to it.  It's being released on April 20th and I wanted to give it a bit of promotion.  Christine was kind enough to send me an advance copy (signed, no less!) of the book and I received it yesterday.  I haven't read the entire thing yet, but I'm working on it and I have to say that I'm very impressed so far.  It's a fascinating read and very well-researched to boot.  I encourage everyone to give it a read: Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea.     

 
 
 Report to moderator    Logged 
 
 
 

Quote from: TheEngineer on August 17, 2008, 12:22:28 AM

Quote from: cbarnett97 on August 17, 2008, 12:15:13 AM

I am still waiting for the answer to this so after you answer it we can then move onto other topics

I'm not on another topic.   

/\    acceleration of the earth.  /\     acceleration of the person
|                                          |
|                                          |
When these are equal, the person has reached terminal velocity.

|
\/  Acceleration of the person.  /\  Acceleration due to air resistance.
                                           |
When these are equal, the person has reached terminal velocity.


Does that help?  I tried to make it so simple a 6th grader could understand.  But I may be giving you too much credit.

So you already gave up on your equations then, good for you. I will put the question to you also, using the FE model calculate the terminal velocity of a smooth ball and I want to see the math