In the beginning

um im curious... where did you hear of this dark energy? i believe it was physicists correct??? physicists who also prove that dark energy is accelerating because gravity is having less of an impact since the universe is so massive.

Well, I'm not an expert however, I was under the impression that Dark Energy <at least the concept from physicists> was only ever strong over GREAT distances, permeats all of space, and has not been experimentally noticed.

true. i mean we dont have this energy in our bodies or even on our planet, but dark energy is becoming more prevalent in the universe, which is in fact pretty fucking big. it is becoming more of a factor because the galaxies are merging together in clusters and thus decreasing the pull of gravity which would slow this acceleration of the universe down. the universe is only getting bigger which further reduces the pull of gravity. just curious where the FE believers got their info on dark energy. you acknowledge the existence of something but then deny the properties of it. and the only people to have ever studied this dark energy extensively, enough to know basic properties, are those who discovered it.

So when I asked if the earth will still be travelling at the same speed after DE is gone, and you said yes, did that not mean that the earth would be moving through space pretty much the same as it is now? Or are you saying that at the moment it's travelling through space faster and faster and faster all the time?

At the moment, the Earth is moving with constant acceleration, which means the velocity is always increasing. When DE stops pushing it, it will move with constant velocity.

Who said DE is gonna stop?

Who said DE is gonna stop?

I did. Page one of this thread.

so the physicists and astronomers who actually DISCOVERED dark energy mean nothing to you?

so the physicists and astronomers who actually DISCOVERED dark energy mean nothing to you?

Pretty much.

haha don't get him wrong.  He's thankful they discovered DE since it a huge component in "one of the most successful FET" i think is somthing I read somewhere on this forum.

hahah i know. i just think it's funny how the FET applies its own rules to dark energy. even though the real properties of this mysterious force seem to be work for the REF. or is dark energy in on the conspiracy too? But no one knows a whole lot about so DE so it really doesnt help the FET or the REF.

Quote from: Funk Master 420 on September 25, 2008, 05:06:49 PM

so the physicists and astronomers who actually DISCOVERED dark energy mean nothing to you?

Pretty much.

That's OK, I'm sure that you don't impress them much either.   

in fact i'm sure they're sitting at their computers staring at this forum with their jaws on the floor astounded at the absurdity of he whole concept of a flat earth.

in fact i'm sure they're sitting at their computers staring at this forum with their jaws on the floor astounded at the absurdity of he whole concept of a flat earth.

That would be a nice change: round earth believers that actually have some knowledge of physics.

Quote from: Funk Master 420 on September 26, 2008, 09:42:29 AM

in fact i'm sure they're sitting at their computers staring at this forum with their jaws on the floor astounded at the absurdity of he whole concept of a flat earth.

That would be a nice change: round earth believers that actually have some knowledge of physics.

I believe you meant Flat earth... typo?

He's is stereotyping.  Basically he's implying people who believe in round earth don't know their physics.  His evidence is based primarily on this forum I'd suppose.  Where... admittedly, RErs haven't done as much homework on their physics as the FErs

Depends what you're referring to though. If you're referring to actual physics and not those dreamed up by the FE'ers then you're correct. We haven't done our homework.

Depends what you're referring to though. If you're referring to actual physics and not those dreamed up by the FE'ers then you're correct. We haven't done our homework.

I don't think Einstein was a FEer.

Quote from: Funk Master 420 on September 26, 2008, 11:11:40 AM

Depends what you're referring to though. If you're referring to actual physics and not those dreamed up by the FE'ers then you're correct. We haven't done our homework.

I don't think Einstein was a FEer.

I don't understand how FE'ers can use theoretical physics to explain FET, bendy light, Dark Energy and the like; but RE'ers can't use theoretical physics to explain RET, the Graviton Particle, etc...?  Can someone explain?

i think youre one your own on that one. not even the FE'ers have an answer for that one.

Quote from: TheCat on September 25, 2008, 02:24:46 PM

So when I asked if the earth will still be travelling at the same speed after DE is gone, and you said yes, did that not mean that the earth would be moving through space pretty much the same as it is now? Or are you saying that at the moment it's travelling through space faster and faster and faster all the time?

At the moment, the Earth is moving with constant acceleration, which means the velocity is always increasing. When DE stops pushing it, it will move with constant velocity.

So how come it's going to cool down to the point where it'll "collapse" into a sphere? If it's moving with constant velocity, won't it maintain a constant temperature?

So how come it's going to cool down to the point where it'll "collapse" into a sphere? If it's moving with constant velocity, won't it maintain a constant temperature?

That's like saying a piece of ice won't melt if it maintains a constant velocity. Velocity and temperature have nothing to do with each other.

Velocity and temperature have nothing to do with each other.

Fail.

Fail.

I meant the mean velocity of all parts of the object. He doesn't seem to understand physics very well, so I wasn't about to go into details of individual molecular velocities.

Yes his fail was epic.

He's a she. And the physics is rusty - hence all the questions.

However we still don't seem to have established why some celestial bodies formed as round things but the earth formed as a flat thing. I really would have thought (limited as I am by my paltry understanding of physics) that all would have formed in a very similar fashion.


And also, to be perfectly honest, to convince the populace of flat-earthedness, you'd be wanting to be able to explain it all in a very simple fashion and not be relying on everyone having a good understanding of physics.

And also, to be perfectly honest, to convince the populace of flat-earthedness, you'd be wanting to be able to explain it all in a very simple fashion and not be relying on everyone having a good understanding of physics.

People seem to grasp the concept of a Round Earth orbiting the Sun okay without understanding how gravitation works or being able to use Kepler's laws.

Quote from: TheCat on October 02, 2008, 01:55:51 PM

And also, to be perfectly honest, to convince the populace of flat-earthedness, you'd be wanting to be able to explain it all in a very simple fashion and not be relying on everyone having a good understanding of physics.

People seem to grasp the concept of a Round Earth orbiting the Sun okay without understanding how gravitation works or being able to use Kepler's laws.

But that's because they have it explained to them in simple, easy to understand terms.  How about a flat earth equivelant explanation.

I mean - if you had to go into primary schools next week and explain how the earth and the solar system and universe etc works, what would you say to children so that they'd understand it?

But that's because they have it explained to them in simple, easy to understand terms.  How about a flat earth equivelant explanation.

I mean - if you had to go into primary schools next week and explain how the earth and the solar system and universe etc works, what would you say to children so that they'd understand it?

I'd tell them that the Earth is pushing them up and they aren't falling down to it.

Also, the layman's grasp of the truth doesn't change what it is.

Quote from: TheCat on October 03, 2008, 02:02:18 PM

But that's because they have it explained to them in simple, easy to understand terms.  How about a flat earth equivelant explanation.

I mean - if you had to go into primary schools next week and explain how the earth and the solar system and universe etc works, what would you say to children so that they'd understand it?

I'd tell them that the Earth is pushing them up and they aren't falling down to it.

Also, the layman's grasp of the truth doesn't change what it is.

And "In the beginning" the Earth was created flat and other celestial bodies weren't because............?

Again, please aim this to primary school children

"In the beginning" the Earth was created flat and other celestial bodies weren't because............?

Because celestial bodies are not the earth.