Try this experiment

Not any answers are conclusive, It doesn't explain comets that return every 71 years, it thinks that comets and meteors are stationary stuff we run into in space but I thought everything was going the same direction and at the same speed. 

Nope, no good,
nada,
Nil
Zilch


Conspiracy

Is anyone actually trying the experiment i proposed in the first post?

Not any answers are conclusive, It doesn't explain comets that return every 71 years, it thinks that comets and meteors are stationary stuff we run into in space but I thought everything was going the same direction and at the same speed.

So local movements are not allowed if everything is accelerating together? Well then, since the entire Universe is expanding in RET, we must be getting further away from the Sun, and the Earth itself must be getting bigger. Since that isn't observed, RET cannot be correct. Another win for FE!

Pah, as we follow your 'more serious' method to 'prove round' you do these experiments.
[/quote]

I  read through your "experiments." Idiot. Just look at those diagrams! if you extend those curved diagrams out the earth would only be about 30 or 40 miles around and then of course the flags would seem like different heights.  But the real earth has a radius of 3,949 miles.  A 6 mile arc on a 3,949 miles radius circle would appear as almost* a straight line (*straight enough that a telescope from the 1800s wouldn't be able to tell the difference.  If you did those experiments with modern equipment you would see a difference in the heights of the flags.

here is a picture in autocad, to scale, of a round earth (white) with a six mile arc on it (red):

Here it is zoomed in so you can see that it is basically just a straight line on that scale:


you're an idiot.

huh?, Local movements are not allowed according to your Faq,  it states that everything is moving in the same direction and accelerating at the same speed.

Another win for RE's

huh?, Local movements are not allowed according to your Faq,  it states that everything is moving in the same direction and accelerating at the same speed.

Another win for RE's

The fact that you are an idiot does not automatically create a win for your cause.

Who is the bigger idiot.  At least I don't think that the world is flat and that there is a conspiracy to cover that up.

and since you cannot answer that question with anything other than a weak remark,  Another win for RE.

Your just upset cuz you haven't seen a real girl naked yet.

pow another win

go back and play Dungeons & Dragons and cry in the corner,  unless you don't believe in corners either.

ouch

Who is the bigger idiot.

You are.

At least I don't think that the world is flat and that there is a conspiracy to cover that up.

At least I end my questions with question marks.

and since you cannot answer that question with anything other than a weak remark,  Another win for RE.

Considering where your post goes from here, I'll just chuckle at the irony and move on.

Your just upset cuz you haven't seen a real girl naked yet.

So?

pow another win

I don't think so.

go back and play Dungeons & Dragons and cry in the corner,  unless you don't believe in corners either.

I'd rather stay here and make you look like an even bigger fool than you already are.

ouch

Another victory for FE!

Well I guess it doesn't need to go anywhere.  You have confirmed my victory and also that you have yet to see be with a girl and that you are a geek who plays D & D.  Anybody can get a clear picture of you without needing any more information.  Thank you for helping me with my punctuation, if that makes you feel any better.  Here are some question marks for you.


oh I am so foolish, I need to end it all, I think I will go jump off the edge of the earth after I climb up that 150 foot ice wall that goes completely around the earth.  Oh the pain,  that last idiot remark really got me.

btw you have a Lyco's emblem next to a Bull as your avitar.  Do I need to say more?  Look I used a question mark.


Owned. 

Well I guess it doesn't need to go anywhere.

I don't know what this is in reference to, and I'm not going to try to work it out if you aren't going to make it clear.

You have confirmed my victory and also that you have yet to see be with a girl and that you are a geek who plays D & D.

Oh, have I? I must have missed it. Damndest thing.

Anybody can get a clear picture of you without needing any more information.

Any more information than what?

Thank you for helping me with my punctuation, if that makes you feel any better.

You are beyond help.

Here are some question marks for you.

Good. Now maybe you can figure out which of your sentences are questions and place them more appropriately.

oh I am so foolish, I need to end it all, I think I will go jump off the edge of the earth after I climb up that 150 foot ice wall that goes completely around the earth.  Oh the pain,  that last idiot remark really got me.

I don't remember calling you an idiot in my last post. I invite you to prove me wrong, however.

btw you have a Lyco's emblem next to a Bull as your avitar.  Do I need to say more?  Look I used a question mark.

What the hell is Lyco's?

Owned.

Yes, you were.

RoboSteve,

You state all light bends upward. By upwards do you mean "straight up" as in perpendicular to the surface of flat earth?

And is the sun also affected the same way?

First post by the way. VERY interesting site.

144.160.5.25

Thank you for providing me with your IP address, citizen of Michigan and subscriber to Ameritech Electronic Commerce. I have saved your IP to a text file on my hard drive for future reference. Good day.

RoboSteve,

You state all light bends upward. By upwards do you mean "straight up" as in perpendicular to the surface of flat earth?

And is the sun also affected the same way?

First post by the way. VERY interesting site.

It is bent in a parabolic arc with upwards concavity. The acceleration is always perpendicular for the velocity because the speed of light is constant. Yes, sunlight is affected in the same way, as are all parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Welcome to FES.

Thanks. I'm enjoying the discussions immensly.

I have other questions but am trying to read up a little more on topics that have been previously discussed. And I'll readily admit I don't have near the background of knowledge of many of the subjects covered that I've seen from both sides of the arguement on this site.

Thanks. I'm enjoying the discussions immensly.

I have other questions but am trying to read up a little more on topics that have been previously discussed. And I'll readily admit I don't have near the background of knowledge of many of the subjects covered that I've seen from both sides of the arguement on this site.

You seem like an intelligent character; undoubtedly you shall learn. I have been here not even two months, and already I have learned a lot from this website, perhaps even more than I ever learned at school. Not in terms of the quantity of knowledge, but in terms of the importance of thinking skills.

That's what I'm enjoying about it.

The discussions here are not your everyday type. A lot of questioning of scientific theory and things of that nature that I find very interesting.

That's what I'm enjoying about it.

The discussions here are not your everyday type. A lot of questioning of scientific theory and things of that nature that I find very interesting.

Yes. I think people could get so much more out of this site if they looked at it from an objective standpoint and not a dogmatic RE one, as most do.

wrong state, and wrong service.  Nice try.  Better work on you look up skills.

gaday mate

Quote from: Dark Knight on August 18, 2008, 12:50:03 PM

Not any answers are conclusive, It doesn't explain comets that return every 71 years, it thinks that comets and meteors are stationary stuff we run into in space but I thought everything was going the same direction and at the same speed.

So local movements are not allowed if everything is accelerating together? Well then, since the entire Universe is expanding in RET, we must be getting further away from the Sun, and the Earth itself must be getting bigger. Since that isn't observed, RET cannot be correct. Another win for FE!

How the hell did you make that leap of logic? There is a theory that the universe is expanding on a universal scale. Expansion is not experienced galactically or even within the local group. This has never been suggested. Some recent theories suggest that expansion is actually a time dilation effect experienced by us as observers due to our presence in this particular region of space.

Good effort though.

I go away for a few days and all these posts!!!

Anyway... somewhere in this thread there seemed to have been a post trying to show how FE takes "gravitationally up" to work. The idea of standing at a center of a lake of ice and seeing which way you slid under "gravity".

Well... first, under RE you would have to calculate the gravitational attraction of a disk as large as the FE'ers claim and assume that there is some tensile strength of the "earth" so as to not auto-collapse in on itself into a sphere. (And oh, you'll have to do these calculations in GR, using the Newtonian short cut will not be acceptable to FEers.)

Assuming for a moment that said calculation indicated some sliding on a flat and otherwise "level" ice lake (gotta wonder how we'd define level in this case), I doubt the FEers would agree with this assumption anyway because, IIRC the FE'ers think that it still wouldn't apply as the actual material that the Earth is made up of is not affected by "gravity".

Could an FE'er agree with this guess on my part? And if so... do we have an FE'er and an RE'er in the house who can perform said calculation?

face it robosteve

when you got beat with the UGLY STICK, the stick put up a fight saying "no i dont wanna touch that thing"

BAM another RE victory

How the hell did you make that leap of logic? There is a theory that the universe is expanding on a universal scale. Expansion is not experienced galactically or even within the local group. This has never been suggested. Some recent theories suggest that expansion is actually a time dilation effect experienced by us as observers due to our presence in this particular region of space.

Good effort though.

I am aware of that. However, it seems to be a recurring argument against FET that if everything is accelerating together, then we can't collide with meteors and other objects, and that long period comets cannot be explained, because everything is moving at the same speed. Applying that same reasoning to RET, since the whole Universe is expanding, local irregularities cannot be allowed.

face it robosteve

when you got beat with the UGLY STICK, the stick put up a fight saying "no i dont wanna touch that thing"

BAM another RE victory

This is just weak. Take your shit to Angry Ranting, you're not wanted here.

It is bent in a parabolic arc with upwards concavity. The acceleration is always perpendicular for the velocity because the speed of light is constant. Yes, sunlight is affected in the same way, as are all parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Welcome to FES.

Why a parabola, rather than, say, circular motion? Do you have any idea what rules govern the path of light yet, other than it accelerates upwards?

I'm happy to crunch the numbers, but only if I know what problem I'm actually solving.

On another note, I've solved your differential equation, but the answer is implicit and horrible.

If

then

f * (f²-r²)^0.5 - log[ f + (f²-r²)^0.5] = +/- 2 r c t

Derived like so:

f² (df/dt)² = r² (c² - (df/dt)²)

f² = (rc)² (dt/df)² - r²

(f² + r²)^0.5 = +/- rc (dt/df)

Integrate w.r.t. f to get the equation in blue.

Why a parabola, rather than, say, circular motion? Do you have any idea what rules govern the path of light yet, other than it accelerates upwards?

A parabola seems to me the most mathematically simple shape that it could take that fits the observations. Circular motion would of course be easier to model, but we don't see light looping around on itself - and in any case, how do we then define what happens to horizontal light, does it bend up or down? I suppose it could be semicircular motion that ends in a vertical straight line. Other alternatives that could fit the observations would be a hyperbolic cosine, a secant curve (which would perfectly emulate the effect of a round Earth) and perhaps a hyperbola, too.

On another note, I've solved your differential equation, but the answer is implicit and horrible.

If

then

f * (f²-r²)^0.5 - log[ f + (f²-r²)^0.5] = +/- 2 r c t

Derived like so:

f² (df/dt)² = r² (c² - (df/dt)²)

f² = (rc)² (dt/df)² - r²

(f² + r²)^0.5 = +/- rc (dt/df)

Integrate w.r.t. f to get the equation in blue.

Thanks for that. It is messy, though interestingly it does give t as an explicit function of x (or f). I'm not certain how best to work out y as a function of t from that, however. I know I could do it with an explicit form of f(t) - do you know if there is a way to get an explicit function out of that?