How would natural forces create a flat suspended object

Remember the part where I said educated?

Much like how a rainbow isn't physical. You can't walk to the end of a rainbow, because a rainbow is strictly light passing through a certain spectrum of color.

Uh, visible light is the spectrum of color.  Rainbows are created when light passes through water and is split into its constituant wavelengths.  Rainbows are indeed physical.

You defy the possibility that maybe there isn't anything beyond our Sun and Moon, and that any other body we see suspended in space is nothing more than our Sun's light affecting what we really view?

This statement is akward, so I will reply the way I read it:  Is it possible that the Sun is lighting up everything in the galaxy? NO. Is the light from the Sun affecting what we see in the universe?  NO.  Are there other bodies in the universe? YES.

 I never said the world was flat.

My words seem to have been defended admirably, but I think I'll respond to Welbourne as well.  Maybe you didn't say that the sun was lighting the whole galaxy, but you did say that when I think I'm seeing galaxies, it's really just my interpretation of light from the sun.

So, suppose I'm viewing these things that I think are galaxies at night.  How does the sunlight get to my eyes?

Quote from: "Erasmus"

Yes, I have seen galaxies, through telescopes, that appeared to me to be distinctly nonspherical.  While observing the galaxy, I was in a region of the universe that contained the galaxy, so yes, I guess you could say that I was there.

Good try, Erasmus, but everyone knows that the "galaxy" you're viewing through a telescope, assuming that telescopes even work properly, is really just the way the human eye perceives light emitted from the Sun.

Next you'll be trying to tell us that the Earth is flat.

If you assume that the world is round, and try to assert that must be because a flat object is eventually puilled into a round shape, it is likely to assume that you also believe in the RE assertion of modern astronomy wich includes various shapes of galixies, which tend towards variations of disks, which would seem to contradict the original assertion that gravity must tend to pull everything in to a ball.  

Also for the RE's there's the rings of Saturn to explain if things must form balls.

Erasmus, is the Moon illuminated with light from the Sun? The correct answer is yes. Would it be possible that light reflecting off of the moon also affected your view? This would indirectly be the Sun's light affecting your view. Seems very plausible.

Engineer, a rainbow isn't physical in the same sense as how a country is physical, or a person is. The day you walk up to a rainbow and touch it, and have this same situation documented, you can challenge what's known. Otherwise, you're wrong. Oh, yeah - All you're doing is rewording my original posts to make my statements seem awkward. Like we didn't all catch onto your deceptive ways, you sly devil you.

If you assume that the world is round, and try to assert that must be because a flat object is eventually puilled into a round shape, it is likely to assume that you also believe in the RE assertion of modern astronomy wich includes various shapes of galixies, which tend towards variations of disks, which would seem to contradict the original assertion that gravity must tend to pull everything in to a ball.  

Also for the RE's there's the rings of Saturn to explain if things must form balls.

A galaxy isn't one single hunk of mass. It's a cluster of stars, planets, and so on. Why would it be a sphere?

Saturn's rings are spacial particles - dust and small meteors - caught in it's orbit. It's not like Saturn formed and at the same time there was a "flat" ring around it. It only seems flat due to the distance, and the way these particles are travelling.

A galaxy isn't one single hunk of mass. It's a cluster of stars, planets, and so on. Why would it be a sphere?

And a planet isn't a solid thing, It's a cluster of Molecules, Particles and so on.  At the sub atomic level, it's mostly nothing.  It's just a quesion of scale.

Under RE theories, both are formed pretty much the same way, gravity causes the smaller bits to gather around a more massive center.  The earth has a dense core, probably of iron, galaxies has a central core, probably of black holes.

As I said elsewhere with my Pizza reference,  all you need is a little spin to cause nature to form elongated object,  only without any othe influenct will you get a sphere.

Yes, a planet is a cluster of particles. Particles which are compacted into a solid. I don't see where you have an argument. That's like debating whether there's even such a thing as a "solid." Everything can be broken down.

Yes, a planet is a cluster of particles. Particles which are compacted into a solid. I don't see where you have an argument. That's like debating whether there's even such a thing as a "solid." Everything can be broken down.

As the particles are pulling together, if the oject is spinning and subjected to tidal forces, it should end up like a pizza pie.

The Earth's gravitational pull is obviously stronger than the orbit it's traveling in.

Erasmus, is the Moon illuminated with light from the Sun? The correct answer is yes. Would it be possible that light reflecting off of the moon also affected your view? This would indirectly be the Sun's light affecting your view. Seems very plausible.

Seems plausible, except when not only the sun but also the moon is below the horizon.

The Earth's gravitational pull is obviously stronger than the orbit it's traveling in.

Is the centripital force of a rotating pizza stronger than the elastic force of it's dough? No, it's just strong enough to warp it, not rip it apart.

But even if it was so, it only is applicable if the earth was a sphere, if the eath is a disk it would not need to be, if it was, then the earth would be  pulled into whatever gravitational field helped pull it disk shaped, unless something pulled it away form the gravitational source.  Which supports the "Dark Energy" theory of the earth accelerating through space.

Using a pizza analogy, the only reason the dough doesn't rip apart is because you stop rotating it when the size seems fit. If you were to keep twirling pizza dough, it would most definitely tear into chunks and spread apart.

I don't understand how that supports the idea of the Earth being flat. Using your analogy, should the Earth not be breaking into individual pieces? Or did whatever force elongated and flattened it become sentient and decide that that was as far as the Earth should be stretched?

Seems plausible, except when not only the sun but also the moon is below the horizon.

In any given situation, who's to say that there isn't some fragment of light which didn't escape far enough to still toy with your vision?

I don't understand how that supports the idea of the Earth being flat. Using your analogy, should the Earth not be breaking into individual pieces? Or did whatever force elongated and flattened it become sentient and decide that that was as far as the Earth should be stretched?

Because at some point before it reached the breaking point it either cooled enough to solidify, or the dark energy began pushing it away from the gravity source, and starting it on it's journey.