Gravitational field of earth

Quote from: cbreiling on August 26, 2008, 05:29:58 PM

Sorry Marshal, I meant to write 99.89372. That's much more sophisticated. 

Right, so how did you get this number?

I made it up. See, first I took the orbital data of Mercury, Venus, Earth, Luna, Mars, Deimos Phobos, Ceres, Jupiter, Io, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto, Saturn, Titan, Uranus, Neptune, Triton, and Pluto for the period of one year. Then I selected 53 of the most well-known artificial satellites in Earth Orbit, including the Hubble and the ISS. I then compared each set of orbital observational data with what would be predicted by Newton's equations.

The result was so far over 99.99% that I figured you wouldn't believe me, so I picked a number that was really large, but realistically off, using a bit of psychology. All very scientific.

Please show your work.   

Please show your work.   

I did it in my head. I also count spilled toothpicks.

Glad to see you're finally realising how this site works, cbreiling

I made it up.

That's where you are wrong.

Quote from: cbreiling on August 27, 2008, 12:50:15 PM

I made it up.

That's where you are wrong.

Prove it.

It's already proven. You made it up, but that doesn't mean it's true.

It's already proven. You made it up, but that doesn't mean it's true.

I remain skeptical of your "proof." I want to see data.

Read,

You made it up, but that doesn't mean it's true.

It's a philosophical way of questioning your credibility. Of course, you claimed that the number is made up. Why should anyone accept or believe in something made up by you? Are you an expert in the relevant field?


What makes you more credible than anyone else such that your claims should be accepted?

Could someone please explain this to me?

Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field.  What we know as 'gravity' is provided by the acceleration of the earth.

This is from the FAQ. This makes no sense. All matter (anything having mass) generates a gravitational field, even you and me. This was proved by the Cavendish experiment. I also performed this experiment in a college class.

How does the earth magically not generate a gravitational field?

The simple answer is FE is indeed wrong. Everything with mass generates a gravitational fiel directlly prportional to its mass  (mre mass = more spacial disruption = more gravity ) This is why water  droplets all form perfect spheres on Earth.

Quote from: cbreiling on August 26, 2008, 05:29:58 PM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 25, 2008, 11:14:42 PM

Quote from: cbreiling on August 25, 2008, 11:12:52 PM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 25, 2008, 10:06:47 PM

...angular velocity of 7.3 * 10^-5 s^-1.

Watch those units, Steve. You used "hertz" above.  (Lame attempt at busting chops.)

That is the correct unit for angular velocity.

Dude, you're supposed to be the physics student! The units of angular velocity are "degrees per second" not "per second" (hertz) as you wrote. 

I am a physics student, yes. That is how I know that I used the correct unit for angular velocity.

When you steal numbers you should quote them. 

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JasonAtkins.shtml

The SI unit is radians per second (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radians_per_second), but can also be converted to other units such as Hz, where 1 rad/s = 1/2π Hz

A radian is a pure number, since it corresponds to a metre of arc per metre radius, or metres per metre. Thus, the unit I used (s^-1) is equivalent to radians per second.

When you steal numbers you should quote them. 

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JasonAtkins.shtml

Just because you can't convert 23 hours 56 minutes into seconds and invert it with a calculator doesn't mean nobody can.

Just because you can't convert 23 hours 56 minutes into seconds and invert it with a calculator doesn't mean nobody can.

We all know you didn't do it. 

We all know you didn't do it. 

What does it matter? You're derailing the thread by drawing attention to the fact that you don't think I pressed a few buttons on a calculator to perform a calculation that any high school student should be able to do. No more of this, please; stay on topic.

Seriously, no more derailments.

I'm still waiting for cbreiling to post more of his stories.

Quote from: Robosteve on August 26, 2008, 02:09:36 AM

Quote from: Josef on August 26, 2008, 12:40:42 AM

That is sweet. What about the centripetal force? The FE radius and speed must give a lot of that force near the edges.

I see two paths.
The first one is that the rotation itself causes "gravity", that somehow cancels out the centripetal force.

The second one is that earth is concave. That explains why water isnt dragged out to the edges. And why youre not "pulled" straight down with "gravity", but also sideways, making it feel that earth is tilting. 

I like the earth being concave (CE! hehe). But it means that light has to be even more bent than on FE.

Im not trying to prove anything, just want to excerice those lazy grays.

It is my view that the Earth's gravitation cancels out the centripetal force.

Can you please explain how?  I'm trying to picture this in my mind's eye...the gravitation effect is pulling us essentially straight down towards the earth, but wouldn't the centripetal force of the rotating earth be at 90 degrees to the gravitational force?  I'm not sure I understand how this could cancel out...in order or that to work out, wouldn't the forces need to be 180 out of phase like noise cancelling headphone use counternoise sinewaves to cancel out noice sine waves?

This is the first time I've noticed any FE indication that the earth is rotating...usually the models presented have the spotlight-sun moving in some sort of ellipse above the surface of the earth...any rotation brings into play a force that works at a right angle to the gravitational effect we feel (or the continuous acceleration that our minds perceive as gravitation).  I'm genuinely curious about any information and/or explanation that you may put forth.

So getting back on track, Robosteve, can you please send some attention my way and answer the question I asked on p3?

To use a Newtonian simplification, he gravitational attraction is pulling us towards the Earth's centre of mass, which is beneath the north pole. At any location not at the pole, therefore, we feel a horizontal component of that attraction in the direction of the pole.

For the love of God, can any of you flat earth people give me absolute proof that I myself do not produce a gravitational field?

For the love of God, can any of you flat earth people give me absolute proof that I myself do not produce a gravitational field?

But you do.

What?

What?

You do produce a gravitational field, insofar as a gravitational field may be defined as curvature of spacetime.

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:06:11 PM

What?

You do produce a gravitational field, insofar as a gravitational field may be defined as curvature of spacetime.

Alright. Then for what reason does the earth not produce one?

Quote from: Robosteve on August 28, 2008, 10:23:38 PM

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:06:11 PM

What?

You do produce a gravitational field, insofar as a gravitational field may be defined as curvature of spacetime.

Alright. Then for what reason does the earth not produce one?

The FET changes all the time and not all fe'ers agree on a single FET.  Robosteve believes that the FE has gravitation.   

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:57:38 PM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 28, 2008, 10:23:38 PM

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:06:11 PM

What?

You do produce a gravitational field, insofar as a gravitational field may be defined as curvature of spacetime.

Alright. Then for what reason does the earth not produce one?

The FET changes all the time and not all fe'ers agree on a single FET.  Robosteve believes that the FE has gravitation.   

Apparently, the flat earthers also believe in magic.

Quote from: sokarul on August 28, 2008, 11:03:14 PM

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:57:38 PM

Quote from: Robosteve on August 28, 2008, 10:23:38 PM

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 10:06:11 PM

What?

You do produce a gravitational field, insofar as a gravitational field may be defined as curvature of spacetime.

Alright. Then for what reason does the earth not produce one?

The FET changes all the time and not all fe'ers agree on a single FET.  Robosteve believes that the FE has gravitation.   

Apparently, the flat earthers also believe in magic.

I have said that so many times I have lost count. 

Apparently, the RE'ers also believe in magic.

Fix'd

Quote from: clydedaferret on August 28, 2008, 11:04:11 PM

Apparently, the RE'ers also believe in magic.

Fix'd

Way to troll the thread. 

TheEngineer, how doesn't GPS require satellites?

You can use strato/psuedollites.

TheEngineer has a good thread about it here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11864.0

To use a Newtonian simplification, he gravitational attraction is pulling us towards the Earth's centre of mass, which is beneath the north pole. At any location not at the pole, therefore, we feel a horizontal component of that attraction in the direction of the pole.

I order for gravitation to cancel out centripetal force due to rotation, the center of gravity would have to be basically at the surface of the north pole.

If I understand the concept correctly, you really cannot use the center of mass in a non-spheroid earth as the center of gravitation.  If the earth is cylindrical and has gravitation then you will be pulled towards all of its mass at all times because each particle of mass also has gravitation.  In this scenario, if you were standing on the exact center of the top of the cylinder you would be pulled perpendicular to the level surface of the earth (or straight down).  But if you were at the equator you would be pulled slightly more towards the north pole that the south since there is more mass in the direction than towards the south.

But in any case, you would still be pulled "downwards", that is to say towards the bulk of the mass.  Being pulled downwards at all times on any surface of the earth only works in a speroid-shaped earth if you accept that all mass has gravitation and that the earth has mass. 

Basically I still don't see any way that gearth's graviation could possible cancel out centripetal force due to rotation...the forces simply cannot be at 180 degrees to each other.