A little science experiment - round earth

  • 88 Replies
  • 8942 Views
?

soban

A little science experiment - round earth
« on: February 18, 2009, 12:25:48 PM »
A couple of students in Cambridge university organized a miniature spaceflight. This clearly shows that the earth is spherical.

http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~cuspaceflight/media.php

What are your thoughts on this?


*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12089
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2009, 01:05:59 PM »
That clearly shows the edge of the sun's 'spotlight'.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38908
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2009, 01:12:02 PM »
That clearly shows the edge of the sun's 'spotlight'.

That doesn't look like a spotlight to me.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17478
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2009, 01:17:38 PM »
Quote
That doesn't look like a spotlight to me.

That's funny, it looks like the distant boundaries of a circular area of light to me.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12089
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2009, 01:18:07 PM »
I was just about to say the same thing. It is funny, isn't it?
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38908
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2009, 01:27:41 PM »
Could you please point out where you see the day/night terminator line in that picture?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17478
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2009, 01:48:37 PM »
Could you please point out where you see the day/night terminator line in that picture?

It's right on the horizon of that scene, tens of thousands of miles distant from the observer.

Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2009, 01:59:13 PM »
It's rather odd how you can see sunlight being reflected back at the far edge of the 'spotlight'. In fact, the most intense reflection seems to be coming from the most distant parts of this spotlight, when you would expect it to be coming from the area between the camera and the Sun.

Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2009, 03:02:20 PM »

That's funny, it looks like the distant boundaries of a circular area of light to me.

Then you would be wrong. Something is wrong with your observational skills, you and Rowbotham seem to have a lot in common.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2009, 08:29:00 PM »
I think it may be the edge of the disc. If you squint you can see the ice wall.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38908
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2009, 08:09:06 AM »
Could you please point out where you see the day/night terminator line in that picture?

It's right on the horizon of that scene, tens of thousands of miles distant from the observer.

How did you arrive at the tens of thousands of miles distant conclusion? 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17478
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2009, 12:35:06 PM »
How did you arrive at the tens of thousands of miles distant conclusion? 

The launch of the balloon was done at the break of dawn and the spotlight of the sun is at a minimum 12,500 miles wide depending on the time of the year.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2009, 03:33:50 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2009, 12:57:52 AM »
How did you arrive at the tens of thousands of miles distant conclusion? 

The launch of the balloon was done at the break of dawn and the spotlight of the sun is at a minimum 12,500 miles wide depending on the time of the year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2009, 10:12:57 AM »
 If this fails to show you evidence for round earth then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. If 10 students can send rocket to space with budget about ?1000 then what can do people with more money, resources and and knowledge.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17478
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2009, 10:15:51 AM »
If this fails to show you evidence for round earth then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. If 10 students can send rocket to space with budget about ?1000 then what can do people with more money, resources and and knowledge.

Actually it wasn't a rocket. It was a balloon. And it didn't go into space.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2009, 05:07:11 AM by Tom Bishop »

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2009, 10:22:08 AM »
If this fails to show you evidence for round earth then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. If 10 students can send rocket to space with budget about ?1000 then what can do people with more money, resources and and knowledge.

Actually it wasn't a rocket. It was a balloon. And it didn't go into space.

/fail
You fail and don't nitpick. A quote from their webpage - during a test flight that is one small step for Cambridge University students aiming to launch a rocket into space for under ?1,000. I referred to their goal, not state of project. And they got to near space(33 kilometers) with their balloon. So, when ballon can go up to 33 kilometers how high can go device which uses some fuel. So, you fail again
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17478
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2009, 10:34:14 AM »
You fail and don't nitpick. A quote from their webpage - during a test flight that is one small step for Cambridge University students aiming to launch a rocket into space for under ?1,000. I referred to their goal, not state of project. And they got to near space(33 kilometers) with their balloon. So, when ballon can go up to 33 kilometers how high can go device which uses some fuel. So, you fail again

I'm not sure how a rocket launch which never took place demonstrates your point that sustained space flight is possible. A balloon is not a rocket. It doesn't go into space, into earth orbit, nor does it fit the definition of achieving sustained spaceflight at all.

Lurk more. Fail less.

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2009, 10:39:13 AM »
You fail and don't nitpick. A quote from their webpage - during a test flight that is one small step for Cambridge University students aiming to launch a rocket into space for under ?1,000. I referred to their goal, not state of project. And they got to near space(33 kilometers) with their balloon. So, when ballon can go up to 33 kilometers how high can go device which uses some fuel. So, you fail again

I'm not sure how a rocket flight which never took place demonstrates your point that sustained space flight is possible. A balloon is not a rocket. It doesn't go into space, into earth orbit, nor does it fit the definition of achieving sustained spaceflight at all.
You fail to see farther from your own nose. They are university's undergraduates and they achieved height 33km with only balloon. Their goal is rocket. And you make a very bold claim here that no educated man/men with resources can do no more than some university's undergraduates. Very bold.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2009, 10:41:14 AM »
You fail and don't nitpick. A quote from their webpage - during a test flight that is one small step for Cambridge University students aiming to launch a rocket into space for under ?1,000. I referred to their goal, not state of project. And they got to near space(33 kilometers) with their balloon. So, when ballon can go up to 33 kilometers how high can go device which uses some fuel. So, you fail again

I'm not sure how a rocket flight which never took place demonstrates your point that sustained space flight is possible. A balloon is not a rocket. It doesn't go into space, into earth orbit, nor does it fit the definition of achieving sustained spaceflight at all.
You fail to see farther from your own nose. They are university's undergraduates and they achieved height 33km with only balloon. Their goal is rocket. And you make a very bold claim here that no educated man/men with resources can do no more than some university's undergraduates. Very bold.

Maybe you should study reality.  On either model, FE or RE, lighter than air flight works just a bit differently than heavier than air flight.  Do some research.

Or do you think you could build a plane that can go that high for under a grand?
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2009, 10:59:57 AM »
Maybe you should study reality.  On either model, FE or RE, lighter than air flight works just a bit differently than heavier than air flight.  Do some research.

Or do you think you could build a plane that can go that high for under a grand?
  You have wrong recipient. Why don't you write them - cuspaceflight@cusu.cam.ac.uk - and tell them the same thing.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2009, 11:02:17 AM »
Maybe you should study reality.  On either model, FE or RE, lighter than air flight works just a bit differently than heavier than air flight.  Do some research.

Or do you think you could build a plane that can go that high for under a grand?
  You have wrong recipient. Why don't you write them - cuspaceflight@cusu.cam.ac.uk - and tell them the same thing.

They didn't post here.  You did.
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2009, 11:33:40 AM »
Maybe you should study reality.  On either model, FE or RE, lighter than air flight works just a bit differently than heavier than air flight.  Do some research.

Or do you think you could build a plane that can go that high for under a grand?
  You have wrong recipient. Why don't you write them - cuspaceflight@cusu.cam.ac.uk - and tell them the same thing.

They didn't post here.  You did.
So what. If someone says you that someone trashes your car do you attack the person who says to you that or the person who trashes your car? If you have problem with things which are done by other people why do you attack the person who talks to you about these other people... weird person.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2009, 11:37:43 AM »
Maybe you should study reality.  On either model, FE or RE, lighter than air flight works just a bit differently than heavier than air flight.  Do some research.

Or do you think you could build a plane that can go that high for under a grand?
  You have wrong recipient. Why don't you write them - cuspaceflight@cusu.cam.ac.uk - and tell them the same thing.

They didn't post here.  You did.
So what. If someone says you that someone trashes your car do you attack the person who says to you that or the person who trashes your car? If you have problem with things which are done by other people why do you attack the person who talks to you about these other people... weird person.

You came here and posted their experiment as some sort of proof of space flight.  You are wrong, since heavier than air flight is not the same as what they are doing.  The science of floating a balloon to 33 klicks is not the same as trying to lift a mass of metal out past the LEO.

So yes, you are the person I am asking for some sort of proof.
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #23 on: February 24, 2009, 11:48:50 AM »
You came here and posted their experiment as some sort of proof of space flight.  You are wrong, since heavier than air flight is not the same as what they are doing.  The science of floating a balloon to 33 klicks is not the same as trying to lift a mass of metal out past the LEO.

So yes, you are the person I am asking for some sort of proof.
No, I didn't post their experiment. I am not the author of first message and I didn't post my message as proof of space flight. I just said that it shows that unmanned space flight is possible. Especially when they reach their goal. And you still have a wrong recipient whatever I write here. I am not doing these things, they do and if you think that they try impossible things then write to them already
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2009, 11:54:02 AM »
You came here and posted their experiment as some sort of proof of space flight.  You are wrong, since heavier than air flight is not the same as what they are doing.  The science of floating a balloon to 33 klicks is not the same as trying to lift a mass of metal out past the LEO.

So yes, you are the person I am asking for some sort of proof.
No, I didn't post their experiment. I am not the author of first message and I didn't post my message as proof of space flight. I just said that it shows that unmanned space flight is possible. Especially when they reach their goal. And you still have a wrong recipient whatever I write here. I am not doing these things, they do and if you think that they try impossible things then write to them already

Reaching 33 klicks doesn't show shit.

"The most commonly used definition of outer space is everything beyond the K?rm?n line, which is 100 kilometers (62 mi) above the Earth's surface. (The United States sometimes defines outer space as everything beyond 50 miles (80 km) in altitude.)"

Even by the easiest definition, they missed by 17 klicks.  How does this prove anything?  You say it does, now back it up or shut the F*** up.
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #25 on: February 24, 2009, 11:59:22 AM »
Reaching 33 klicks doesn't show shit.

"The most commonly used definition of outer space is everything beyond the K?rm?n line, which is 100 kilometers (62 mi) above the Earth's surface. (The United States sometimes defines outer space as everything beyond 50 miles (80 km) in altitude.)"

Even by the easiest definition, they missed by 17 klicks.  How does this prove anything?  You say it does, now back it up or shut the F*** up.
You know, you really, really should learn to read and then you should learn to understand what you just read. My whole point was that if some university's undergraduates can reach near space and when successful event to space then what can be done with really smart and educated men and more resources. With organization even. But you really just can't do nothing more than bother with out of context things in my posts.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #26 on: February 24, 2009, 12:09:40 PM »
Reaching 33 klicks doesn't show shit.

"The most commonly used definition of outer space is everything beyond the K?rm?n line, which is 100 kilometers (62 mi) above the Earth's surface. (The United States sometimes defines outer space as everything beyond 50 miles (80 km) in altitude.)"

Even by the easiest definition, they missed by 17 klicks.  How does this prove anything?  You say it does, now back it up or shut the F*** up.
You know, you really, really should learn to read and then you should learn to understand what you just read. My whole point was that if some university's undergraduates can reach near space and when successful event to space then what can be done with really smart and educated men and more resources. With organization even. But you really just can't do nothing more than bother with out of context things in my posts.

You posted a picture of a bunch of people with a balloon and claim that shows that other people can lift metal into space, and you're talking about me being out of context?

Pay attention, you frigging idiot.

No number of people playing with lighter than air flight shows you anything about heavier than air flight.

If you don't understand something that simple, I'm not surprised that I have to spell it out in small words for you.

The number of people, amount of money to spend, resources, none of that means a damn thing to your post.  You are dealing with two entirely different principles here.

I'll make it easy on you. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceflight
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft

I'd send you a link to better sites than wiki, but I doubt you have the ability to make sense of them.

Come back when you can understand "Different than"  as in women are different than men.
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #27 on: February 24, 2009, 12:19:23 PM »

 <bunch of not relevant stuff deleted>

Come back when you can understand "Different than"  as in women are different than men.
And you go back and start reading this thread from start. My first post was - If this fails to show you evidence for round earth then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. If 10 students can send rocket to space with budget about ?1000 then what can do people with more money, resources and and knowledge.
 Nothing more. Didn't post any pictures, didn't claim anything. Pay attention to that that I said If.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #28 on: February 24, 2009, 12:33:05 PM »
And you go back and start reading this thread from start. My first post was - If this fails to show you evidence for round earth then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. If 10 students can send rocket to space with budget about ?1000 then what can do people with more money, resources and and knowledge.
 Nothing more. Didn't post any pictures, didn't claim anything. Pay attention to that that I said If.

In this post: zork on Today at 13:48:50, you said, and I quote:  "I just said that it shows that unmanned space flight is possible."

That is the point I have been trying to make to you.  It doesn't prove shit.  Go back to your own posts, read what you wrote again.  You claimed that it proved unmanned space flight was possible.  Now, back that claim up, or shut the F*** up.

And, by the way, how is this:

"No number of people playing with lighter than air flight shows you anything about heavier than air flight.

If you don't understand something that simple, I'm not surprised that I have to spell it out in small words for you.

The number of people, amount of money to spend, resources, none of that means a damn thing to your post.  You are dealing with two entirely different principles here."

Not relevant to you claiming that launching a balloon to 33 klicks proves unmanned space flight?

Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: A little science experiment - round earth
« Reply #29 on: February 24, 2009, 12:42:05 PM »
In this post: zork on Today at 13:48:50, you said, and I quote:  "I just said that it shows that unmanned space flight is possible."

That is the point I have been trying to make to you.  It doesn't prove shit.  Go back to your own posts, read what you wrote again.  You claimed that it proved unmanned space flight was possible.  Now, back that claim up, or shut the F*** up.
You just quoted what I said and I said "showed" not "proved". And I still stand by it that if they are successful about their project and can send rocket up to space, then it clearly shows that unmanned space flight is possible. So, their potential launch window is in summer 2009 and we can wait till then.

And, by the way, how is this:

"No number of people playing with lighter than air flight shows you anything about heavier than air flight.
Go and read their web site. Ohh, sorry, you can't do that. Suppose I must do copy/paste from there.

The Nova project is to launch balloons to about 30km altitude, carrying small payloads and prototypes for the Martlet rocket launch platform.
The aim of the Martlet Project is to develop a small sounding rocket system that will be launched from a helium balloon at around 30km altitude. The rocket will have a maximum apogee of around 150km, taking it past the official boundary boundary of space that is set at 100km.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.