Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth

  • 606 Replies
  • 93205 Views
?

Vongeo

  • Official Member
  • 6004
  • I don't get it either.
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #60 on: September 17, 2010, 06:26:03 PM »
With those altered wooden balls talked about by REers, You would not have us attempt to make up a straight glass factory all over the world? thats a lot
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!

*

Vindictus

  • 5455
  • insightful personal text
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #61 on: September 17, 2010, 07:43:25 PM »
My maths, I think you'll find is as flaw-free as British Glass' products.

That 0.47 bend is over a distance of 6m which is entirely possible. If I take a stand of hair 1mm thick, can i not deflect it 2mm down? Of course I can. It is however, impossible to shave something that thin with a bend like that, back to straight, which was the point of the maths.

The body of liquid is of infinite length if this is an infinite process. The bath tank needs only to be 6m to get the effect I just demonstrated. But it is much much longer. Hundreds of metres.

So how about you demonstrate some Maths, or come back with a hard fact? All this guess work by you guys requires me to do the leg work. But I'm already happy with the solution. The earth is flat. If you don't like that answer PROVE, not stab at wildly with a suggestion, that I am wrong.  :D

Your mathematical process and your numbers were fine.

The fashion in which you applied them is not. The bending of the glass must be proportional to it's mass, length or thickness. The bending length of a 1km piece of glass would not be exactly the same as that of a 0.4mm sheet. The difference must scale with the glass' properties, so it always remains minute and unnoticeable.

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #62 on: September 17, 2010, 09:54:46 PM »
Is it just me or does this kid not comprehend what a level is? Or how to engineer a near perfectly level surface area over a curved surface or an uneven surface? Talk about playing for ignorance as if these people aren't smart enough on how to build a facility that is level. In fact you could do it to where each section conforms to the curvature of the Earth to level out float line to exact specification required to produce the float glass. ::) In fact I can think of many engineering solutions to the problem.  It seems the level of IQ in the room has dropped ten fold.

 BTW, who here has the blue prints and engineering data in the construction of the facility? Anyone?
« Last Edit: September 17, 2010, 10:02:26 PM by TheJackel »
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #63 on: September 17, 2010, 09:59:17 PM »
Is it just me or does this kid not comprehend what a level is? Or how to engineer a near perfectly level surface area over a curved surface or an uneven surface? Talk about playing for ignorance as if these people aren't smart enough on how to build a facility that is level.  ::) It seems the level of IQ in the room has dropped ten fold.

Another example of willful ignorance is the fact that no FE'er is willing to question the validity of a source which someone claims supports FE.
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #64 on: September 18, 2010, 03:05:55 AM »
And what? You're gonna assume the Earth is flat because of 1 reasoning that seems well-done and that RE'ers cannot demolish completely?
Is this all you need to assert so firmly the earth is flat?

You still have to show us a map, an explanation for eclipses, get together if the Earth is infinite or finite, if the sun is spherical or a spotlight, and of course, the experiment that... I thought it was debunker showed here about lasers and that no FE'er could prove wrong.

So please, do not try to contradict a whole mountain of evidence of a round earth with one simple reasoning.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #65 on: September 18, 2010, 03:39:32 AM »
This really points to how badly FEers misquote.

The article clearly states: "in widths up to 3 metres." There are no tolerances in the article. There is no piece of flat glass produced larger than can fit in a lorry. That the line is long does not mean that the piece of glass is long. That's like saying a car is half of a kilometer long because its assembly plant is half of a kilometer long.

EPIC fail for FE, again.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #66 on: September 18, 2010, 01:33:26 PM »
Mr Clock Tower,

I deliberately did the maths for a 6 metre length of glass to address your concerns about tolerances. Please check back through the post.

A 6m piece of glass will be curved by 0.47mm. As the article by British Glass states, they make glass down to 0.4mm.
Therefore no amount of shaving will make it flat as you will cut away all the surface (0.4 mm of it) if you cut 0.47mm into it to get it flat. And as stated if something curves 117.5% of its total thickness, it certainly cannot be said to be "perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

As for one piece of evidence, I have constructed a deliciously thought-provoking second example to help prove the earth is flat, that I hoped to post this evening. However some of the data which I know to be true, I have only found numbers for on wikipedia, yahoo answers and forums. Being as I now have a flavour of RE scepticism, I will postpone my challenge another day or two, until a more trustworthy source can verify for you the starting data. I wouldn't want to leave you in any doubt.  ;)

Mr Jackel, I have reiterated several times already, that the bottom of a liquid has no bearing on the shape of the top of it. No amount of levelling the tank is going to change what happens to the surface. On a round earth the fluid will emulate the shape of the earth. - i.e curved. The fact that you can't grasp this fundamental concept, puts your IQ in question far more than my own.

Mr Kira. Perhaps you would prove eclipses to me first from a round earth perspective. I would like you to concentrate specifically on why the moon is exactly the right distance from the sun and earth, to exactly cover the sun and not be too big or too small. I would also like you to explain why it is the moon always faces the earth so we always see the same side of it, and that it spins at exactly the same rate as its orbit time (roughly 28 days), but yet that the earth doesn't always face the same way for the moon. Coincidence will obviously not suffice as an answer for either issue.  ;)

I'm off now to see if I can find some authentic sites, with which to submit my next puzzle.

Have a good evening all.

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #67 on: September 18, 2010, 01:59:10 PM »
Coincidence is not enough??
Well, since we are no Gods, and maybe the universe doesn't even have a sense. I cannot tell you WHY, I could have told you HOW, and you did that yourself.

There are only hows, the whys are for religion or philosophy. So I cannot add anymore, you answered sufficiently well.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #68 on: September 18, 2010, 02:07:45 PM »
Ok to settle this pointless debate I have created the following illustration of a flat object (the factory) on a curved surface (a ball).



Are you stating that in your round earth model that gravity is pulling in uniform from all points on that flat surface?  Cause most RE's would say no. LOL, you guyz don't even have a Unified Round Earth Theory.  How about instead of wasting time here you get together and try and work out a unified RE theory.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41919
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #69 on: September 18, 2010, 02:08:25 PM »
A 6m piece of glass will be curved by 0.47mm. As the article by British Glass states, they make glass down to 0.4mm. 

How much will a 6m piece of glass flex?  Where is it stated that the flat glass is inspected for curvature? 

Therefore no amount of shaving will make it flat as you will cut away all the surface (0.4 mm of it) if you cut 0.47mm into it to get it flat. And as stated if something curves 117.5% of its total thickness, it certainly cannot be said to be "perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Where does it say that the glass is shaved to bring it into tolerance? 
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.

*

berny_74

  • 1786
  • The IceWall! Beat that
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #70 on: September 18, 2010, 05:49:56 PM »
Okay brand new - was bored and read this and rolled my eyes a lot.

Although not an expert in glass though PDF explains that the glass although poured on the molten tin it is rolled afterwords due to the effects of surface tension and gravity.  I haven't gotten quite into the differences of gravity of FE or RE yet but for this application I am assuming both modes will work the same.

This is explained more in depth in a Wikipedia article on float glass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Float_glass

Also explains the tin bath is usual 50 metres long.

Since the tin float is only 50 metres long any bend is pretty miniscule and as it leaves the float bath it gets rolled to its final width.

The glass flows onto the tin surface forming a floating ribbon with perfectly smooth surfaces on both sides and an even thickness. As the glass flows along the tin bath, the temperature is gradually reduced from 1100C until the sheet can be lifted from the tin onto rollers at approximately 600C. The glass ribbon is pulled off the bath by rollers at a controlled speed. Variation in the flow speed and roller speed enables glass sheets of varying thickness to be formed. Top rollers positioned above the molten tin may be used to control both the thickness and the width of the glass ribbon.

Thats is from wikipedia.

Therefore any curvature can be  dealt with as well as any flaws.

Now you might ask how does this prove RE versus FE.  It doesn't.
The formation of glass since it is malleable at all stages until the finishing stage means it can curved or flat as required by the consumer.  Now most people want flat pieces of glass.  But there is no reason the the manufacturer could not make lightly curved or extremely curved  from this process.

So the OP does not prove or disprove FE or RE.

Berny
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Moonlight is good for you.

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #71 on: September 18, 2010, 06:05:25 PM »
Mr Clock Tower,

I deliberately did the maths for a 6 metre length of glass to address your concerns about tolerances. Please check back through the post.

A 6m piece of glass will be curved by 0.47mm. As the article by British Glass states, they make glass down to 0.4mm.
Therefore no amount of shaving will make it flat as you will cut away all the surface (0.4 mm of it) if you cut 0.47mm into it to get it flat. And as stated if something curves 117.5% of its total thickness, it certainly cannot be said to be "perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

As for one piece of evidence, I have constructed a deliciously thought-provoking second example to help prove the earth is flat, that I hoped to post this evening. However some of the data which I know to be true, I have only found numbers for on wikipedia, yahoo answers and forums. Being as I now have a flavour of RE scepticism, I will postpone my challenge another day or two, until a more trustworthy source can verify for you the starting data. I wouldn't want to leave you in any doubt.  ;)
Please show us the tolerances of a 6m long 0.4 mm flat piece of glass, and then you might have a basis for an argument. Until then, you're just guessing. Marketing hyperbole is not a basis of an argument.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Lorddave

  • 16635
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #72 on: September 18, 2010, 06:11:54 PM »
Ok to settle this pointless debate I have created the following illustration of a flat object (the factory) on a curved surface (a ball).



Are you stating that in your round earth model that gravity is pulling in uniform from all points on that flat surface?  Cause most RE's would say no. LOL, you guyz don't even have a Unified Round Earth Theory.  How about instead of wasting time here you get together and try and work out a unified RE theory.
When did I mention gravity?  We're talking about curvature of the land.
I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #73 on: September 18, 2010, 07:16:51 PM »
Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass is exactly that. Bending 117.5% of thickness is a huge margin.

Quote
Marketing hyperbole is not a basis of an argument.

Are you saying that British Glass are liars? That this is false advertising, and that the glass industry watch-dog should take them to task over their claims? Surely their customers, could sue for buying a more inferior product than was promised? You are skirting the edge of libel.

Are these guys liars too? Note they claim perfectly flat glass twice in their info.
http://www.glassonweb.com/articles/article/233/

Is the whole glass industry full of liars? The flat earthers liars? Anyone who presents something you don't understand a liar? I hope not because that would be a sad sad day.  :(

This is where we input you are really dumb.. You really don't know anything on the engineering aspect of this do you? Nor do you comprehend marketing. There is no such thing as Perfectly flat btw.. Take a microscope to a piece of flat glass and you will find variances in thickness, height ect. It's as close as they can get to perfect. And again you seem to have no concept of exactly how it's done in regards to the exact engineering details.. Like I said before, learn how to use a level.

You are not an engineer, nor do you have the information on exactly how the facility is built to make flat Glass.. All you have provided was a PDF describing the process in what appears to be in marketing format or laymen format. And companies like these aren't going to make public on exactly how they managed to do so because they do plan on staying in business with the least amount of competition possible.

So until you can provide us with all the engineering detail of the process and how the facility was constructed, you have absolutely nothing to base your assertions on. It only takes a raised floor to level out an uneven surface area lol.. Hence, learn how to use a level.

« Last Edit: September 18, 2010, 08:36:17 PM by TheJackel »
FE T-shirts = Profit = conspiracy = ideological cult in the making = teaching stupid = paranoia = nut case. Any questions?

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #74 on: September 18, 2010, 07:43:19 PM »
Yes, everything is a coincidence, everything just happened like it happened, or we would be in a different universe.
As you can see I haven't asked you for nothing in this thread, I was just saying that 1 reasoning doesn't prove wrong thousands of evidences for the opposite. Only that.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #75 on: September 18, 2010, 09:38:05 PM »
Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass is exactly that. Bending 117.5% of thickness is a huge margin.

Quote
Marketing hyperbole is not a basis of an argument.

Are you saying that British Glass are liars? That this is false advertising, and that the glass industry watch-dog should take them to task over their claims? Surely their customers, could sue for buying a more inferior product than was promised? You are skirting the edge of libel.

Are these guys liars too? Note they claim perfectly flat glass twice in their info.
http://www.glassonweb.com/articles/article/233/

Is the whole glass industry full of liars? The flat earthers liars? Anyone who presents something you don't understand a liar? I hope not because that would be a sad sad day.  :(




When you produce the engineering standards you might have the start of an argument. Until then marketing hyperbole is not an argument.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #76 on: September 19, 2010, 05:58:56 AM »
Ok Thork, here you have an answer for one of your questions:
- Why moon always faces the same the earth? Because of Synchronous Rotation, caused by Tidal Locking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_locking

I couldn't find "why" the moon is at the exact distance of the sun to produce eclipses, I'll keep looking, but I would say that it's a coincidence from the time when the cosmic dust started joining and forming bodies. It's the same with life, life is a biological coincidence, it just happened because the conditions caused it.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #77 on: September 19, 2010, 06:56:34 AM »
Actually I am going to extend the challenge a little further if you don't mind. Re theory states all the planets go around the sun.
Why don't all the planets then face the sun? Why aren't they tidally locked? In fact not one of them is.


Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #78 on: September 19, 2010, 07:11:44 AM »
Actually I am going to extend the challenge a little further if you don't mind. Re theory states all the planets go around the sun.
Why don't all the planets then face the sun? Why aren't they tidally locked? In fact not one of them is.


Are you suggesting that all of the planets don't go around the Sun in FET?
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #79 on: September 19, 2010, 07:23:01 AM »
First thanks. At least you did some research.

But you can't trust wikipedia. Any old idiot could have written that. Your article says
Quote
Usually, only the satellite becomes tidally locked around the larger body

Check out point 3. in the article below.
Quote
The tidal forces are reciprocal

So why doesn't the earth face the moon?
And please don't come back with "there is no water on the moon". Its not that kind of tidal.
Quote
The interior of the Earth and Moon are heated by the tides in their bodies

And by the way. I wish you all the luck in the world finding out why the moon is the exact size and difference from the sun to perform an eclipse. That is going to be one long search.  ;)




- I encourage you to edit wikipedia writing some stupidity, and check how long it takes to be corrected. Wikipedia is a valid source, because the info there is contrasted and edited if something is wrong in no time

- The tidal force is reciprocal, but it doesn't mean it has to produce the same effect. For example, according to physics, when I hit a surface, it "hits me back" with the same force, it's reciprocal. But you don't feel the same hitting a brick wall than a comfy armchair right? Well, this said, due to the difference in mass and in composition, the moon affects us giving us tides, and we affect it making it always showing the same face to us.

- In the point 2 of your article it appears the Roche Limit, where any solid object would be destroyed thanks to the gravitational force of other objects. We can then assume that the moon is where it is by 2 reasons:
 1: It cannot be closer because the Roche Limit would destroy it.
 2: It cannot be further, or the earth's gravity wouldn't hold it in place.

- And finally, all planets are affected by the sun's gravity enough to rotate about it, but not enough to be "locked", once again, distance and masses are what determine this.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #80 on: September 19, 2010, 08:02:38 AM »
I'm new to this site so I'm still working my way through the theories put forward by the FE society. In all honesty I don't know what they say. I'm not suggesting anything either way. Kira used tidal locking as an example for a round earth. Well that's fine. But then if that is the case why isn't the earth facing the moon, and all the planets facing the sun? Tidal locking relies on one body exerting its gravity on another. The moon exerts gravity back on earth and the sun on all of its planets. If it didn't they would drift out of their orbits. So something doesn't fit. Maybe its because the earth is flat and that throws up a whole different set of conditions? Maybe the earth doesn't spin? Maybe all the universe goes around the earth? Its relativity. If you take earth as a stationary point in space everything else goes around it in varying orbits. Who is to say the earth isn't completely stationary and that the sun, planets stars etc all move in relation to that datum point? These guys believe that.
http://www.galileowaswrong.com/galileowaswrong/
The other planets may well go round the sun, but that has no bearing on everything else moving in relation to earth.
Even NASA are wobbling on the issue.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/06may_lunarranging/
And as for relativity I will quote from the same article
Quote
Finding a flaw in the underpinnings of relativity could lead to a new "Theory of Everything," finally combining quantum physics and gravity in one harmonious framework.
That would smash the reasoning behind a lot of the round earth arguments put forward on this site. Maybe a new dawn is upon us?

Back to Kira. I'm going to be a round earther just for a moment (don't worry it wont last long). It is the interior crushing and deflecting of a body that produces tidal locking - an inherent loss from the process. It is apparent that the earth is squeezed by the moon because of the tides of the seas on earth. Using tidal locking we can reverse calculations and suggest that in the time of the dinosaurs an earth day was only 22 hours. At the point the earth hit another body in space to create the moon the spin time was only 5 hours (from memory it might not be 5 hours, feel free to check but that's what the dusty bits behind my frontal cortex are giving me). So the earth is being slowed by the moon. Now whether or not the earth will be at a standstill before we lose the moon or not (because the moon is leaving its orbit by about 2 inches a year and will eventually be unable to sustain its orbit, at which point it will be ejected from the solar system). That doesn't matter because if the moon doesn't stop the earth, the sun will finish the job. This will eventually lead to the earth being still. This will induce the collapse of the earth's magnetic field and solar radiation will be able to strip away the atmosphere as it did on Mars (albeit for different reasons on Mars. Mars cooled quicker so its core could not move so its field collapsed). This will be the end of life on earth.  :o

Now doesn't all this scare mongering seem a bit far fetched to you? I mean here you all are objecting to the fact that this glass is flat. But you will happily swallow this 'the end is nigh' story, with all kinds of theories and leaps of faith just to fit the model. Flat Earth is simpler. Occam's razor.  ;D

?

Kira-SY

  • 1139
  • Ja pierdole!
Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #81 on: September 19, 2010, 08:15:51 AM »
Galileo Was Wrong is another religious bullshit, let's keep that out of scientific topics.

And well, it's dangerous for you to lean on Occam's Razor, for several reasons:
- No agreement whether the Earth is finite or infinite
- Bendy light theory is supported by some and not for another
- UA, dark matter, eather, mechanisms that would make the sun and moon rotate above us, moon being bioluminiscent, anti-moon, dark object causing the eclipses.
- A conspiracy without a clear objective.

And many other subjects on which FlarEarthers cannot get an agreement, nor getting evidences, nor getting convincing explanations to each other. All of those things that can't be proven, and that are made up as soon as some problem appears with the FET.

Occam's razor supports the Round Earth.

Good luck on getting your way through this theory. I'll stick with the one with tons of books and information supporting it, in what everybody agrees with.
Signature under building process, our apologies for the inconveniences

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #82 on: September 19, 2010, 08:33:39 AM »
As for other flat earther's I can't comment. In this thread alone though TheJackel disagrees with you all and believes that the liquid will be flat if you level the underlying surface. Just because other flat earthers may be confused as to the entire mechanics of the theory doesn't make it wrong. It is much easier for them to be confused on an issue, as everything they were ever taught hinges on a different theory. Before you state that as a reason, evolution is not taught in many public schools in the US. I assume you like evolution as a theory too?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_school.htm

Quote
Occam's razor supports the Round Earth.
Please prove. I'll await that one with baited breath along with the reason the moon is exactly the right size and distance to cover the sun to cover your eclipse theory.

Quote
I'll stick with the one with tons of books and information supporting it, in what everybody agrees with
There a many people on this forum who don't agree with it. Everybody is a sweeping statement.  ;)

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #83 on: September 19, 2010, 08:54:06 AM »
Some quick maths ...
1 mile = 1.609344 km
Suppose that the earth is a sphere of radius 3963 miles as claimed. If you are at a point P on the earth's surface and move tangent to the surface a distance of 1 mile then you can form a right angled triangel as in the diagram. Using the theorem of Pythagoras a2 = 39632 + 12 = 15705370 and thus a = 3963.000126 miles. Thus your position is 3963.000126 - 3963 = 0.000126 miles above the surface of the earth. 0.000126 miles = 12*5280*0.000126 = 7.98 inches. Hence the earth's surface curves at approximately 8 inches per mile.

In summation, their glass would bend 3 inches over the half kilometre molten bath and not be "perfectly flat, flaw-less glass".

What gives round-earthers?
You forget that the Earth and some math are not linear.

At 6m, the deviation is only 2.8 micrometers.

I guess we need to send you back to school.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #84 on: September 19, 2010, 09:22:10 AM »
Oh, please educate me. Workings please.

Otherwise I'm going to say 0.47mm over 6m as that is what I have shown above.

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #85 on: September 19, 2010, 09:29:30 AM »
Oh, please educate me. Workings please.

Otherwise I'm going to say 0.47mm over 6m as that is what I have shown above.
Please do your own homework correctly from now on.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #86 on: September 19, 2010, 09:39:28 AM »
We damn well don't get that. That is the exact way I calculated it before!

We at least agree on the picture so
r is 6371km
what ever that letter at the top is (A?) : that is 1


So with Pythagoras

(6371 * 6371) + (1 * 1) = 40589642 km^2
Square rooting this will give my hypotenuse
=6371.00007848061480 km
So my error over a kilometre earth's curve is 6371.00007848061480 km - 6371 = 0.00007848061480 km (allegedly, its flat of course)
That is 0.07848061 metres
That is 7.848061 centimetres for every kilometre.
That is 78.48061 mm for every kilometre. not 28 micrometres or whatever you pulled out of the air.

Please, show me my error.

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #87 on: September 19, 2010, 09:45:23 AM »
We damn well don't get that. That is the exact way I calculated it before!

We at least agree on the picture so
r is 6371km
what ever that letter at the top is (A?) : that is 1


So with Pythagoras

(6371 * 6371) + (1 * 1) = 40589642 km^2
Square rooting this will give my hypotenuse
=6371.00007848061480 km
So my error over a kilometre earth's curve is 6371.00007848061480 km - 6371 = 0.00007848061480 km (allegedly, its flat of course)
That is 0.07848061 metres
That is 7.848061 centimetres for every kilometre.
That is 78.48061 mm for every kilometre. not 28 micrometres or whatever you pulled out of the air.

Please, show me my error.
The letter is a-prime. A common notation.

Again, you assume that the equation involved is linear. It is not. The statement "That is 7.848061 centimetres for every kilometre." is false. And there you fail, miserably! Try starting with 6m and you're get my answer.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #88 on: September 19, 2010, 09:57:09 AM »
Quote
The statement "That is 7.848061 centimetres for every kilometre." is false

What is it over a kilometre then? C'mon baby steps for me. Show me the workings step by step as I did for you. I'm a dumb flat earther. I won't get it without the numbers. How far does earth bend in a kilometre please?


Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth
« Reply #89 on: September 19, 2010, 10:02:21 AM »
Quote
The statement "That is 7.848061 centimetres for every kilometre." is false

What is it over a kilometre then? C'mon baby steps for me. Show me the workings step by step as I did for you. I'm a dumb flat earther. I won't get it without the numbers. How far does earth bend in a kilometre please?


The problem is the word "every". That implies linear function is involved. It is not, by your own post. I get 0.07839 m at 1 km, and 0.31357 m at 2 km.

The formula for d is in the post with the circle. You can plug in your values for r and a' as you please.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards