Axes to FES: Part 1

• 43 Replies
• 8960 Views
?

Thevoiceofreason

• 1792
• Bendy Truth specialist
Axes to FES: Part 1
« on: April 08, 2010, 05:41:58 AM »
I'm back...

On Round Earth, things fall, because the earth has mass. However if you go high enough, you have less gravity due to Newton’s inverse square law: F=G*m1*m2/r^2 with r being distance to the center of mass. Also, if you go in a canyon, you also have less gravity, because there is stuff above you to pulling you. Finally, in you are over a dense part of the earth, such as over rock instead of water, you will have more gravity, because you are closer to denser parts of the earth. How does this work under FET, which predicts even acceleration?
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Sources-
Gravity varies on different parts of the earth.  This coincides with both altitude and geography
Source from Cornell- http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=465
measured results http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Earth%27s_gravity

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

Better yet http://science.howstuffworks.com/missing-gravity.htm
And BTW

It can be measured to more than 5 decimal places for you lovers of accuracy
http://www.geol.lsu.edu/Faculty/Nunn/gl4062/chp6.htm
http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/28263
« Last Edit: May 03, 2010, 06:45:49 PM by Thevoiceofreason »

?

Thermal Detonator

• 3135
• Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2010, 05:55:26 AM »
They have no sensible answer for this. They will accuse the data of being in error, it's their only defence. Unless you use the Infinite plane model.
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

?

brutsi

• 69
• RE
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2010, 12:28:11 PM »
Yeah, i tried that one too, and that gravity is less on equator becuase of centrifugal force, and that the earth is thicker at the equator therefore further away from centermass, than at either of the poles.

?

Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2010, 01:50:15 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

?

RAFboiMF

• 144
• Life's two beer mat to explode. duck
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2010, 04:48:47 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.
This mean the earth travells in a large circle and that UA should be stronger on one hemi-plane than on the other. ie. you should feel heavier in say New Zealand than you would in Spain or vice versus (depending which is on the outside of the direction of the arc).
Quote from: Vongeo
It shall be detrimined(No time to spell, yet oddly time to awknowledge the mistake and type about it) eventually.

?

flyingmonkey

• 728
• Troll trolling Trolls
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2010, 06:19:31 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

That doesn't explain any of the effects described, according to your model, the equator is in the middle of the plane from both poles.

Are you saying that the equator accelerates more slowly than the poles?

Lorddave

• 18289
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2010, 06:25:10 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

That doesn't explain any of the effects described, according to your model, the equator is in the middle of the plane from both poles.

Are you saying that the equator accelerates more slowly than the poles?

Wouldn't that mean the equator has a bulge compared to the poles?  Much like a giant hill?
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

?

RAFboiMF

• 144
• Life's two beer mat to explode. duck
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #7 on: April 08, 2010, 06:26:48 PM »
DANGER!!!

they'll come up with bendy UA and bendy earth at this rate
Quote from: Vongeo
It shall be detrimined(No time to spell, yet oddly time to awknowledge the mistake and type about it) eventually.

?

Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #8 on: April 08, 2010, 06:31:41 PM »
DANGER!!!

they'll come up with bendy UA and bendy earth at this rate

Hey what I say will hardly be counted for what "they" will think. Scrap the lopsided and go to the infinite planes model.
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

?

RAFboiMF

• 144
• Life's two beer mat to explode. duck
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #9 on: April 08, 2010, 06:32:30 PM »
Hey what I say will hardly be counted for what "they" will think. Scrap the lopsided and go to the infinite planes model.

Why not scrap the FE model and go to the RE model?
Quote from: Vongeo
It shall be detrimined(No time to spell, yet oddly time to awknowledge the mistake and type about it) eventually.

?

Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2010, 06:38:49 PM »
Hey thats not a bad idea... hey wait a minute
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

Lorddave

• 18289
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #11 on: April 08, 2010, 06:42:56 PM »
Hey thats not a bad idea... hey wait a minute

Crud!  He's on to us!
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

?

RAFboiMF

• 144
• Life's two beer mat to explode. duck
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #12 on: April 08, 2010, 07:04:19 PM »
Well it was worth a try
Quote from: Vongeo
It shall be detrimined(No time to spell, yet oddly time to awknowledge the mistake and type about it) eventually.

?

flyingmonkey

• 728
• Troll trolling Trolls
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #13 on: April 08, 2010, 07:44:27 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

That doesn't explain any of the effects described, according to your model, the equator is in the middle of the plane from both poles.

Are you saying that the equator accelerates more slowly than the poles?

Wouldn't that mean the equator has a bulge compared to the poles?  Much like a giant hill?

Their theory relies on a single constant force to cause gravity.
If we take into account that it is accelerating more slowly than the rest, for any reason, would that not make those parts fall behind and cause a rip in the surface of the Earth?

Infinitely wide and finitely deep is very very thin, any difference in movement force could cause it to rip apart.

?

EarthISroundISproven

• 382
• There is no ice wall
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #14 on: April 08, 2010, 09:41:18 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

That doesn't explain any of the effects described, according to your model, the equator is in the middle of the plane from both poles.

Are you saying that the equator accelerates more slowly than the poles?

Wouldn't that mean the equator has a bulge compared to the poles?  Much like a giant hill?

Their theory relies on a single constant force to cause gravity.
If we take into account that it is accelerating more slowly than the rest, for any reason, would that not make those parts fall behind and cause a rip in the surface of the Earth?

Infinitely wide and finitely deep is very very thin, any difference in movement force could cause it to rip apart.

This is a very good point because this very thin very wide slab has molten lava running along its core and moving tectonic plates on it's surface. It's a lot less stable geologically in a flat shape. The whole thing could split apart like a giant sandwich. I'd like to know how deep they think the outer crust is and what the geological formation of the underside is.

?

Deceiver

• 239
• The grant money made me do it.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #15 on: April 08, 2010, 11:18:39 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

That doesn't explain any of the effects described, according to your model, the equator is in the middle of the plane from both poles.

Are you saying that the equator accelerates more slowly than the poles?

Wouldn't that mean the equator has a bulge compared to the poles?  Much like a giant hill?

Their theory relies on a single constant force to cause gravity.
If we take into account that it is accelerating more slowly than the rest, for any reason, would that not make those parts fall behind and cause a rip in the surface of the Earth?

Infinitely wide and finitely deep is very very thin, any difference in movement force could cause it to rip apart.

This is a very good point because this very thin very wide slab has molten lava running along its core and moving tectonic plates on it's surface. It's a lot less stable geologically in a flat shape. The whole thing could split apart like a giant sandwich. I'd like to know how deep they think the outer crust is and what the geological formation of the underside is.

That's a rather profound series of comments. Any areas that have a higher UA value would naturally be pushed upwards. This would be an incredible driver for crustal rifting. Despite continental crust being significantly stronger, decompression would rift the hell out of it. Since the the oceans clearly contain the earth's lowest elevations (and lowest gravity values) -- the oceans should actually be where ALL the convergent boundaries are located -- rifting could never occur there!

Lord Wilmore

• Vice President
• Flat Earth Believer
• 12107
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2010, 05:18:52 AM »
Guys, try and stick to the topic of the thread. In Flat Earth Debate, meandering topics are very much discouraged.
"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

?

Thevoiceofreason

• 1792
• Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #17 on: April 25, 2010, 09:30:12 PM »
The earth accelerates lopsidedly. Not an official statement, I'm an infinite plane FEer.

As another user has put, If one part of a plane were to accelerate faster than another, it would detach in position from the other:

For example, if the ground is accelerating upward at g, the average acceleration on earth,
and the ground at another point on the earth was accelerating upwards at g+d, whereas d is the difference in acceleration,

integration would yield the first point having the position function y= .5gt2
and the second one having the position function y=.5gt2+.5dt2
with y meaning height and t meaning time.

that means that the difference in hieght will be of .5dt2 for any given moment in time,
and seeing how the yuca flats haven't raced miles above mt. everest, the earth cannot possibly be flat and have different values of acceleration at different points.

?

Thevoiceofreason

• 1792
• Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #18 on: April 28, 2010, 06:03:10 PM »
so any takers, or is this a victory

?

Vongeo

• Official Member
• 6004
• I don't get it either.
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #19 on: April 28, 2010, 06:17:30 PM »
I Think an REer said this would work on an infinite plane.
Vongeo is a wanker, he wears a wanker hat; he always smells like urine and he thinks the Earth is flat.

No longer is this sentence is cut in half. Jekra!

Xerox

• 151
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #20 on: April 28, 2010, 09:22:27 PM »
I Think an REer said this would work on an infinite plane.

I don't think they would.  In RE, the Earth generates gravity due to its mass (just like any other mass).  The more mass in one place, the higher the gravity.  That is basically what the OP was talking about.  In FE, the Earth is accelerating upwards.  For the observed instances to occur in FE, different parts of the disc would be accelerating at different rates at the same time.  That doesn't really sound possible to me.

?

flyingmonkey

• 728
• Troll trolling Trolls
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #21 on: April 28, 2010, 09:38:40 PM »
I Think an REer said this would work on an infinite plane.

I think you missed some posts where we showed it wouldn't.

?

Thevoiceofreason

• 1792
• Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2010, 09:05:56 PM »
I Think an REer said this would work on an infinite plane.

well then they were wrong. if you have an infinite plane that was accelerating upwards, then logically its acceleration compared to a body at rest would obviously be constant per given coordinate. Given the arguments stated, either the data is wrong, or the concept of an upward accelerating flat earth is.

Username

• Administrator
• 17693
• President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2010, 09:56:34 PM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

Xerox

• 151
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #24 on: April 30, 2010, 06:21:01 AM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.

Do you have data to prove this idea?

markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 42701
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #25 on: April 30, 2010, 06:31:23 AM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.

Then you had better tell Tom Bishop to update his model as he thinks the FE is an infinite plane accelerating upwards.
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.

Xerox

• 151
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #26 on: April 30, 2010, 08:39:13 AM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.

Then you had better tell Tom Bishop to update his model as he thinks the FE is an infinite plane accelerating upwards.

Maybe there will be a FE smack down!  Get it...? No?  Nevermind...

?

Thevoiceofreason

• 1792
• Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #27 on: April 30, 2010, 07:14:56 PM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.

ok, and so explain why it wouldn't cave in on itself.
any idiot knows that a massive enough body turns itself into something resembling a sphere

Lord Wilmore

• Vice President
• Flat Earth Believer
• 12107
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2010, 06:08:55 AM »
An infinite plane clearly would not be accelerating upwards as it would cause its own finite gravitational pull from mass.

ok, and so explain why it wouldn't cave in on itself.
any idiot knows that a massive enough body turns itself into something resembling a sphere

And any idiot should know that an infinite plane would work quite differently to a finite body.
"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

?

Crustinator

• 7813
• Bamhammer horror!
Re: Axes to FES: Part 1
« Reply #29 on: May 01, 2010, 06:16:58 AM »
And any idiot should know that an infinite plane would work quite differently to a finite body.

Why's that? Are there different laws of physics?