# Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0

• 5 Replies
• 655 Views

#### Sliver

• 557
##### Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« on: April 25, 2010, 02:39:07 PM »
My first attempt had a typo and was closed, rather than addressed.  So...

I read this in the FAQ.
Quote from: FES FAQ
Q: "How can a compass work on a Flat Earth?"

A: The magnetic field is generated in the same fashion as with the RE (Diagram). Thus, the magnetic south pole is near the geographic north pole, just like on the RE.  The magnetic north pole is on the underside of the Earth. The Ice Wall is not the south pole, but acts as it, as it is the furthest from the center of the earth that you can follow the magnetic field. The field is vertical in this area, accounting for the aurora australis.

I'm wondering what evidence you have to back this up.

?

#### Ellipsis

• 467
##### Re: Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2010, 09:02:27 PM »
The explanation doesn't even make sense.  Even if the opposing magnetic pole were the other side of the "disk," magnets simply wouldn't act in the way they're trying to use to justify it.  They wouldn't be horizontal, parallel to the ground (as we see on a spherical world).  They would instead point vertically, perpendicular to the ground, no matter where on the disk you're standing; this is because the north side of your compass would oppose the northern side of the disk, while the southern side of the compass would be strongly attracted to it.

Notice how, on the spherical world, compasses act normally in most places, then strangely when you approach the apparent "pole" of the object.  This is completely consistent with what we observe in the real world.  You'll notice on the flat planet, though, that the compass always faces the same way on any position from either side of the disk (only changing when you move completely outside of it).  The disk idea makes no sense and was concocted by loonies with no idea how magnets actually function.

#### parsec

• 6196
• 206,265
##### Re: Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2010, 10:54:57 PM »
No.

?

#### Ellipsis

• 467
##### Re: Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2010, 10:59:11 PM »

#### Sliver

• 557
##### Re: Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2010, 07:19:33 PM »
My first attempt had a typo and was closed, rather than addressed.  So...

I read this in the FAQ.
Quote from: FES FAQ
Q: "How can a compass work on a Flat Earth?"

A: The magnetic field is generated in the same fashion as with the RE (Diagram). Thus, the magnetic south pole is near the geographic north pole, just like on the RE.  The magnetic north pole is on the underside of the Earth. The Ice Wall is not the south pole, but acts as it, as it is the furthest from the center of the earth that you can follow the magnetic field. The field is vertical in this area, accounting for the aurora australis.

I'm wondering what evidence you have to back this up.
I'm still waiting on evidence to support your claim.

?

#### Ellipsis

• 467
##### Re: Magnetic Poles, V. 2.0
« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2010, 07:29:51 PM »
Is this the best they can offer?  A simple "no?"     I was just about to start my own thread because I didn't want to double-post.  I really want to know their justification for this.