Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull

  • 43 Replies
  • 10547 Views
?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« on: September 27, 2009, 12:03:21 PM »
Since John Davis prematurely locked the topic we'll have to start a new one to continue where we left off.

Sorry John.

Wrong.

1) It's not a 2-d problem.

2) Quote your sources.

3) Name all your parameters.

4) Units would be nice too.

5) State your objectives.

For reason 2 alone I won't read further.
When is a plane not 2d?

In which case you are assuming that the earth is a plane. Congratulations.

Carl Friedrich Gauss, 1835

That's an insufficient response. Gauss did quite a bit of work you know. Also, since you are making some form of derivation (lord knows what) then there must be more than one formulae involved. Try again.

What parameters did I not name?

"S - the closed surface"

Of what? The earth?

"A - area"

Of what? The earth? The same as S?

"n a normal unit vector"

Meaning what?

"m - mass"

Of what? The earth?

...and so on and so forth...

Use any units that fit.

I'm starting to suspect you have no idea what you've posted and probably copied it from a book.

My object was to get from (1) to (4).

I'm now certain you copied it from a book and haven't the remotest idea what you just posted.

However, this is not what this thread is about.  Specifically, its about the mathematical errors crustinator thinks are wrong with this problem.

Wrong. It's not just the mathematical errors it's the logic errors too.

Otherewise I could say...

The earth is a pyramid.

Proof...

A2 + B2 = C2

PS I do know what a vector is. It's a simple concept really. ;)

PPS I too have a background in mathematics. ;)

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #1 on: September 27, 2009, 12:05:28 PM »
It directly follows from Gauss's Law for gravitation applied to a plane.  Gauss's Law is obviously the base of this.  

This isn't designed to be a proof of the earths shape.  Its designed to show an infinite amount of matter  (in a slab or specifically a plane)  can cause a finite gravitational pull.  If you don't have any legitimate concerns, please bugger off.

I have a degree in Mathematics.  If I were to copy it from a book, I would just have used the method I posted earlier that uses a slab and would have cited it to avoid your crap.  If I were to copy it from a book, its fairly obvious that the math is solid, in which case you are trolling.

It is clear you have no background in mathematics at all.  If you don't know what a unit vector is then you shouldn't be even trying to understand what is going on.  Furthermore, it is silly to make me state which units.  Just use units that fit, like almost any other math formula based in physics.

It is perfectly legitimate to use a 2d surface to approximate.

If you don't know whats going on, please just state so and move on.  If anyone else has issues with the op, please let me know.


If you now what a normal unit vector is, then why ask?
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5180
  • +2/-6
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2009, 12:24:46 PM »
PS I do know what a vector is. It's a simple concept really. ;)

PPS I too have a background in mathematics. ;)
Then start proving these two statements.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2009, 12:25:23 PM »
I have looked over Mr. Davis's working and I see nothing wrong with it. I will concede that the definitions of parameters may appear a little obscure to somebody who is not already familiar with Gauss's law, but it makes perfect sense if you understand the relevant physics and mathematics. He is saying nothing about the Earth, he is simply showing that a hypothetical plane having nonzero mass per unit area will create a nonzero gravitational field in surrounding 3-space.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2009, 12:31:52 PM »
PS I do know what a vector is. It's a simple concept really. ;)

PPS I too have a background in mathematics. ;)
Then start proving these two statements.

I have.

Read the OP.

John Davis, I look forward to your replies to the outstanding questions.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #5 on: September 27, 2009, 01:00:58 PM »
PS I do know what a vector is. It's a simple concept really. ;)

PPS I too have a background in mathematics. ;)
Then start proving these two statements.

I have.

Read the OP.

John Davis, I look forward to your replies to the outstanding questions.
I'm not here to teach you Gauss's Law nor am I here to prove to some user that I know Gauss's Law.

You will be waiting a long time.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2009, 01:03:22 PM by John Davis »
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #6 on: September 27, 2009, 01:14:44 PM »
I'm not here to teach you Gauss's Law nor am I here to prove to some user that I know Gauss's Law.

You will be waiting a long time.

I don't need to be taught Gauss's Law.

I just need to be taught what you think that series of equations of proving.

If you do have a degree in mathematics then you'd know that presenting an undocumented stream like that would get you an F at 9th grade.

As it stands it isn't a solution to anything.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2009, 01:15:40 PM »
I just need to be taught what you think that series of equations of proving.

He's made it quite clear what he is proving.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5180
  • +2/-6
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2009, 01:16:35 PM »
I have.

Read the OP.

John Davis, I look forward to your replies to the outstanding questions.
Well, alright. However, as Parsifal has stated, if you know the relevant mathematics and physics you wouldn't be asking clarifications for these (see below). I'm not an expert in mathematics, but I'm sure JD made it pretty clear in his post that we can calculate the gravitational potential at a given point on the plane.

"S - the closed surface"

Of what? The earth?

"A - area"

Of what? The earth? The same as S?

"n a normal unit vector"

Meaning what?

"m - mass"

Of what? The earth?

...and so on and so forth...

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2009, 01:19:50 PM »
I don't need to be taught Gauss's Law.

I just need to be taught what you think that series of equations of proving.

This isn't designed to be a proof of the earths shape.  Its designed to show an infinite amount of matter  (in a slab or specifically here a plane)  can cause a finite gravitational pull.
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2009, 01:25:15 PM »
This isn't designed to be a proof of the earths shape.  Its designed to show an infinite amount of matter  (in a slab or specifically here a plane)  can cause a finite gravitational pull.

Why not just answer the questions I asked? Then we can move onto phase 2.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2009, 01:41:42 PM »
...as Parsifal has stated, if you know the relevant mathematics and physics you wouldn't be asking clarifications...
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Squat

Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #12 on: September 27, 2009, 02:27:20 PM »
Well I don't know the relevant mathematics so why not explain it all for people like me so we can understand?


?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #13 on: September 27, 2009, 02:42:37 PM »
You ppl are super special.
if an infinite plane had mass, then it would very quickly become a black hole.
so does God's duck tape keep the world in place?

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #14 on: September 27, 2009, 02:46:05 PM »
Well I don't know the relevant mathematics so why not explain it all for people like me so we can understand?



Sure squat, I'd be pleased to go over it for you.

I'm about to run to the market to get some food for dinner, but I'll post again tonight.
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #15 on: September 27, 2009, 02:54:17 PM »
...as Parsifal has stated, if you know the relevant mathematics and physics you wouldn't be asking clarifications...


No. Y'see I understand Gauss's Law. What I don't understand is how you think it explains anything on a flat earth.

Go over your work and fix the points I raised then we can talk some more.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2009, 03:04:32 PM »
...as Parsifal has stated, if you know the relevant mathematics and physics you wouldn't be asking clarifications...


No. Y'see I understand Gauss's Law. What I don't understand is how you think it explains anything on a flat earth.

Go over your work and fix the points I raised then we can talk some more.

Its designed to show an infinite amount of matter  (in a slab or specifically here a plane)  can cause a finite gravitational pull.
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2009, 03:10:22 PM »
if an infinite plane had mass, then it would very quickly become a black hole.

That is both irrelevant to Mr. Davis's mathematics, and in direct contradiction to his result.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2009, 03:12:31 PM by Parsifal »
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2009, 03:35:03 PM »
...as Parsifal has stated, if you know the relevant mathematics and physics you wouldn't be asking clarifications...


No. Y'see I understand Gauss's Law. What I don't understand is how you think it explains anything on a flat earth.

Go over your work and fix the points I raised then we can talk some more.

Its designed to show an infinite amount of matter  (in a slab or specifically here a plane)  can cause a finite gravitational pull.


*sigh*

OK I'll just wait for that explanation you promised Squat...

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #19 on: September 27, 2009, 04:12:55 PM »
Well I don't know the relevant mathematics so why not explain it all for people like me so we can understand?
I'll try to do it in laymans terms to an extent.

(1) is Gauss's Law for Gravitational pull.  I'll go ahead and assume you trust that it is correct and Gauss was right.  

Basically it says we take make a surface around said object.  We divide this up into extremely tiny "bits".  For each bit we designate a vector that is pointing outwards from this "bit" - n that is a unit vector.  We designate another vector for the pull that this tiny "bit" causes due to gravitation, lets call it g.  If we add up the first vector dotted with the second times the area of that bit for all of the bits we get -4*pi*G*m, where m is the mass inside said surface.

The object in this case is an infinite plane.  The surface we'll use for this will be a cylinder.
  
Now, the edges of the cylinder won't matter for this since all the edges' n is perpendicular to the pull towards the mass.  If you take the dot of two perpendicular vectors we get 0.  

For the rest we have two vectors facing opposite directions.  One of them is a unit vector.  When we take the dot product of these we are left with the negative of the other - g.  so n.g=-g.  So obviously we can go ahead and pull that out of the integral.  This leaves us a (2).  We are just left with dA. In this case this evals to (3) since we are dealing with the parallel two tops of the cylinder.

We use the surface density here and arrive at (4).

I was in a hurry here because I haven't left for dinner yet.  We decided to go out so I had a bit longer, but not much.  Let me know if I borked something up here and I'll fix the typo/mindfart later.


If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #20 on: September 27, 2009, 04:16:41 PM »
OK I'll just wait for that explanation you promised Squat...
Please, don't bother unless you have something useful to input.
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #21 on: September 27, 2009, 04:29:03 PM »
"It is not evidence.  The fact that gravitational pull does not decrease with altitude in real life, and does not here either is."

Cornell would have to disagree with you
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=465

and if you don't trust the Americans, here's a Swede's 2 cents:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/askExperts/ae111.cfm

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #22 on: September 27, 2009, 04:31:12 PM »
Please, don't bother unless you have something useful to input.

Quote from: John Davis
Sure squat, I'd be pleased to go over it for you.

I'm about to run to the market to get some food for dinner, but I'll post again tonight.

Once I've read your reply to Squat I'll post more questions (since you seem reluctant/unable to answer my last ones).

Don't worry. It will be useful.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #23 on: September 27, 2009, 04:36:54 PM »
There is a better, step by step explanation here:
http://www.pgccphy.net/1030/gravity.pdf
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.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #24 on: September 27, 2009, 06:05:08 PM »
There is a better, step by step explanation here:
http://www.pgccphy.net/1030/gravity.pdf
Yes, that is a better one, though its less dumbed down.  Assumes you know linear alg.  etc.
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #25 on: September 27, 2009, 06:18:15 PM »
OK I'll just wait for that explanation you promised Squat...
Please, don't bother unless you have something useful to input.

*sigh*

OK Here we go kids...

Lets start for 10.

The Gaussian surface S is a closed surface.

Please describe where this closed surface is in your plane.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #26 on: September 27, 2009, 06:20:02 PM »
OK I'll just wait for that explanation you promised Squat...
Please, don't bother unless you have something useful to input.

*sigh*

OK Here we go kids...

Lets start for 10.

The Gaussian surface S is a closed surface.

Please describe where this closed surface is in your plane.
Its not in the plane.  Will someone else deal with his drivel while I get a beer?
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither

*

Kathleen Wilcox

  • 102
  • +0/-0
  • Lux sit
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #27 on: September 27, 2009, 06:24:00 PM »
OK I'll just wait for that explanation you promised Squat...
Please, don't bother unless you have something useful to input.

*sigh*

OK Here we go kids...

Lets start for 10.

The Gaussian surface S is a closed surface.

Please describe where this closed surface is in your plane.
Its not in the plane.  Will someone else deal with his drivel while I get a beer?
Hey John, make sure you don't drink and derive.

I think it would be a good idea to summarize what the implication of your integration is... And I believe you have a few typos.
"My soul finds rest in God alone: My salvation comes from Him."

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #28 on: September 27, 2009, 06:29:42 PM »
Its not in the plane.

Yes It is. It's on page 4/5.

Quote
In this case, the appropriate Gaussian surface S is a ?pillbox? shape?a short cylinder whose flat faces
(of area A) are parallel to the plane of mass.

It's clear to me that you had someone show you this link (or maybe someone else wrote it out for you, condensing that paper, that would explain why you can't define your units properly) and you haven't the faintest idea what it means.

I'll write a proper reply tomorrow.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: Infinite Flat Plane Pull
« Reply #29 on: September 27, 2009, 06:41:27 PM »
Its not in the plane.

Yes It is. It's on page 4/5.

Quote
In this case, the appropriate Gaussian surface S is a ?pillbox? shape?a short cylinder whose flat faces
(of area A) are parallel to the plane of mass.

It's clear to me that you had someone show you this link (or maybe someone else wrote it out for you, condensing that paper, that would explain why you can't define your units properly) and you haven't the faintest idea what it means.

I'll write a proper reply tomorrow.
Whatever.  

It doesn't say the surface is in the plane in my work or in the one markjo posted.  The plane is in the surface.

I'm done here and I'm done with you. 
If yum can't argue both sid?es, you understnd ither