Flat Earth moves upwards?

Quote from: Ellipsis on May 14, 2010, 03:09:25 AM

Considering you can't put a working map together or even agree on how large the planet is, I'm curious how you think you know the Earth's mass.

I was referring to the standard model in the FAQ. In addition, the Earth's mass-energy continues to increase as it approaches the speed of light with respect to an inertial observer in the universe.

Quote from: Crustinator on May 14, 2010, 03:25:19 AM

Matter on the earth has its gravitational field cancelled, but the same matter elsewhere doesn't?

The Earth does not have to possess the same properties as other objects do in the universe.

Quote from: Crustinator on May 14, 2010, 03:25:19 AM

Quote

"The Earth is a disc." <----- here
"How is the Earth a disc if gravitational compression is true?"
"Either the Earth's mass is not gravitational mass or its gravitational field is canceled out."

Maybe I am missing something here.

You are. See above.

However, I am not assuming that premise as my conclusion, which is precisely the definition of circular reasoning.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on May 14, 2010, 06:41:27 AM

sir, I know but you must use better mathematicals. in Real Earth, acceleration due to the gravity of the earth is by no means constant. lrn2inverse square law. where did I mention velocity? nice strawman.

As I have explained before, time dilation is an effect due to variance in gravitational pull.
with no gravity, this is impossible.

Gravitational variance is generally caused by gravitational influence from celestial bodies above the accelerating Earth. As a result, our proper acceleration weakens at higher altitude.

In addition, if we take Lorentz contraction into account, an accelerating rocket reaching relativistic speed experiences different proper acceleration throughout its structure so long as it stays rigid in the proper frame (see Born rigid motion). The rocket's nose accelerates at a lower rate than its tail as measured by an accelerometer, in order to maintain the constant distance between them for the passenger. This may also explain gravitational variance on FE.

Now, gravitational time dilation arises in a non-inertial frame of reference, since gravitation and acceleration are equivalent according to the Principle of Equivalence. An accelerating observer experiences a slowdown of time relative to a non-accelerating observer. Using this principle, and since it is theoretically possible for acceleration to vary in the accelerating model, we can argue that there is less time dilation at higher altitude (lesser acceleration) and more at lower altitude (greater acceleration).

And it just happens to align with local geography and latitude?

Quote from: Jack on May 16, 2010, 07:28:52 PM

Quote from: Crustinator on May 14, 2010, 03:25:19 AM

Matter on the earth has its gravitational field cancelled, but the same matter elsewhere doesn't?

The Earth does not have to possess the same properties as other objects do in the universe.

Are you suggesting that the Earth is not made of the same kinds of matter that other objects in the universe are made of?

The UA is sticky. it holds the Earth from being pulled up by the heavens.
it can do so, because it has the power to do infinite amounts of work, obviously, as it can increase the kinetic energy of the earth
incessantly.
/FES mode

Quote from: Ellipsis on May 14, 2010, 03:09:25 AM

Considering you can't put a working map together or even agree on how large the planet is, I'm curious how you think you know the Earth's mass.

I was referring to the standard model in the FAQ. In addition, the Earth's mass-energy continues to increase as it approaches the speed of light with respect to an inertial observer in the universe.

Quote from: Crustinator on May 14, 2010, 03:25:19 AM

Matter on the earth has its gravitational field cancelled, but the same matter elsewhere doesn't?

The Earth does not have to possess the same properties as other objects do in the universe.

Quote from: Crustinator on May 14, 2010, 03:25:19 AM

Quote

"The Earth is a disc." <----- here
"How is the Earth a disc if gravitational compression is true?"
"Either the Earth's mass is not gravitational mass or its gravitational field is canceled out."

Maybe I am missing something here.

You are. See above.

However, I am not assuming that premise as my conclusion, which is precisely the definition of circular reasoning.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on May 14, 2010, 06:41:27 AM

sir, I know but you must use better mathematicals. in Real Earth, acceleration due to the gravity of the earth is by no means constant. lrn2inverse square law. where did I mention velocity? nice strawman.

As I have explained before, time dilation is an effect due to variance in gravitational pull.
with no gravity, this is impossible.

Gravitational variance is generally caused by gravitational influence from celestial bodies above the accelerating Earth. As a result, our proper acceleration weakens at higher altitude.

In addition, if we take Lorentz contraction into account, an accelerating rocket reaching relativistic speed experiences different proper acceleration throughout its structure so long as it stays rigid in the proper frame (see Born rigid motion). The rocket's nose accelerates at a lower rate than its tail as measured by an accelerometer, in order to maintain the constant distance between them for the passenger. This may also explain gravitational variance on FE.

Now, gravitational time dilation arises in a non-inertial frame of reference, since gravitation and acceleration are equivalent according to the Principle of Equivalence. An accelerating observer experiences a slowdown of time relative to a non-accelerating observer. Using this principle, and since it is theoretically possible for acceleration to vary in the accelerating model, we can argue that there is less time dilation at higher altitude (lesser acceleration) and more at lower altitude (greater acceleration).

What about, ones at sea?

The Earth does not have to possess the same properties as other objects do in the universe.

Matter is quite a universal object.

However, I am not assuming that premise as my conclusion, which is precisely the definition of circular reasoning.

That's nice. I'd forgotten you'd moved on from trying to prove the earth was flat; simply assumed it was; and then strode forward into Absurdia.