Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth

Quote from: ClockTower on October 17, 2010, 06:10:40 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 17, 2010, 06:05:19 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on October 17, 2010, 04:56:14 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 17, 2010, 04:37:24 PM

The evidence is what I said. Unless you are suggesting that gravitation does not behave as we say it does, do point out our error.

Just to be clear, you now claim that Newton's ULoG is how gravitation behaves, really?

Newton's Universal Law of Gravity describes how gravitation behaves in RET, yes.

Quote

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that every massive particle in the universe attracts every other massive particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Nope. You might want to leave explaining RET to REers since you don't seem to understand even gravitation.

Do tell how I am incorrect.

Even if he does, will you accept his answer? (Not staying he will or won't)

Even if he does, will you accept his answer? (Not staying he will or won't)

That would most certainly depend on his answer. I would accept that it is an answer, but whether or not it is a sound answer is a whole other thing.

For example, if he said that I am incorrect because there is grass in Brazil, I would not accept it as a correct, or even meaningful answer.

Quote from: ClockTower on October 17, 2010, 06:10:40 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 17, 2010, 06:05:19 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on October 17, 2010, 04:56:14 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 17, 2010, 04:37:24 PM

The evidence is what I said. Unless you are suggesting that gravitation does not behave as we say it does, do point out our error.

Just to be clear, you now claim that Newton's ULoG is how gravitation behaves, really?

Newton's Universal Law of Gravity describes how gravitation behaves in RET, yes.

Quote

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that every massive particle in the universe attracts every other massive particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Nope. You might want to leave explaining RET to REers since you don't seem to understand even gravitation.

Do tell how I am incorrect.

Newton's ULoG is inaccurate and fails to predict several observations accurately. There's some 60 pages here to explain it to noobs like you: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19384.0. Please post again after you read that.

Newton's ULoG is inaccurate and fails to predict several observations accurately. There's some 60 pages here to explain it to noobs like you: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19384.0. Please post again after you read that.

I see you linked a thread that explains how gravity does not exist. It seems someone is becoming a FE'er. 

Cheers!

Quote from: ClockTower on October 17, 2010, 06:37:13 PM

Newton's ULoG is inaccurate and fails to predict several observations accurately. There's some 60 pages here to explain it to noobs like you: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19384.0. Please post again after you read that.

I see you linked a thread that explains how gravity does not exist. It seems someone is becoming a FE'er. 

Cheers!

How quaint of you to miss that the topic showed your error. Yes, gravity is potentially a pseudo-force. Yes, Newton's ULoG is wrong. Yes, you were wrong. No, FET's "FE gravity does not exist" is not the same as GR, not even close. Do study more before posting again. Like so many FEers you just don't seem to be able to handle either math or science. Do buy a vowel.

Quote from: zork on October 17, 2010, 01:16:43 PM

Quote from: Thork on October 17, 2010, 09:27:03 AM

Quote from: zork on October 17, 2010, 02:41:33 AM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 16, 2010, 02:45:47 PM

Which part is affected by gravity most. The part that is touching the Earth, or the part that is out in space?

Do you have any evidence other that "I said so" that the "most affected" part should behave as you assume?

Gravity is a function of distance.

Therefore as stated above, the part that is touching the earth will be more effected than the part that is out in space. Will this suffice as evidence?

No, because I didn't ask that. Read again if you didn't get what I asked.

The evidence is what I said. Unless you are suggesting that gravitation does not behave as we say it does, do point out our error.

You still can't read. Where did I ask how gravitation does behave? I am not arguing gravitation here but I wanted to know - why the "most affected" part should behave as you assume(there are of course another forces on top of gravity in the play)? It of course brings along another question about the less affected parts. Just try to explain. Stating Newton's law of universal gravitation doesn't make anything clearer. It's just the statement without any explanation.

thork is for all intents and purposes correct. you cant make flat glass with the method described on a spherical planet. thork please prove the glass manufactured this way is flat.

thork is for all intents and purposes correct. you cant make flat glass with the method described on a spherical planet. thork please prove the glass manufactured this way is flat.

That won't happen. He will just give you the manufacturer's advertising pamphlet. We have been asking this for 12 pgs.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 17, 2010, 04:37:24 PM

Quote from: zork on October 17, 2010, 01:16:43 PM

Quote from: Thork on October 17, 2010, 09:27:03 AM

Quote from: zork on October 17, 2010, 02:41:33 AM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 16, 2010, 02:45:47 PM

Which part is affected by gravity most. The part that is touching the Earth, or the part that is out in space?

Do you have any evidence other that "I said so" that the "most affected" part should behave as you assume?

Gravity is a function of distance.

Therefore as stated above, the part that is touching the earth will be more effected than the part that is out in space. Will this suffice as evidence?

No, because I didn't ask that. Read again if you didn't get what I asked.

The evidence is what I said. Unless you are suggesting that gravitation does not behave as we say it does, do point out our error.

You still can't read. Where did I ask how gravitation does behave? I am not arguing gravitation here but I wanted to know - why the "most affected" part should behave as you assume(there are of course another forces on top of gravity in the play)? It of course brings along another question about the less affected parts. Just try to explain. Stating Newton's law of universal gravitation doesn't make anything clearer. It's just the statement without any explanation.

I have already explained this about five times. I'm not going to do it again because you cannot read or retain information. Please re-read the thread again.

thork is for all intents and purposes correct. you cant make flat glass with the method described on a spherical planet. thork please prove the glass manufactured this way is flat.

AAAAGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!. Its this ground hog thread again.

It is nothing to do with advertising. Its flat!

Please for a love of all that is holy LURK MOAR!

RE'ers don't know how else to prove you are wrong. At first they tried with physics, but alas, they failed, so now they are attacking the company itself in the hopes that this time they may be correct.

Quote from: contract_feral on October 18, 2010, 04:16:15 AM

thork is for all intents and purposes correct. you cant make flat glass with the method described on a spherical planet. thork please prove the glass manufactured this way is flat.

AAAAGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!. Its this ground hog thread again.

It is nothing to do with advertising. Its flat!

Please for a love of all that is holy LURK MOAR!

How about you send me a sizable piece of perfectly flat glass that is 2m by 2m and I will place a level on it and I will see if its perfectly flat.  If it is I will give you 5 British Pounds.

Berny
Needs a new window.

How about you send me a sizable piece of perfectly flat glass that is 2m by 2m and I will place a level on it and I will see if its perfectly flat.  If it is I will give you 5 British Pounds.

Berny
Needs a new window.

Why don't you just use that £5 to buy some glass from them? 

Quote from: berny_74 on October 18, 2010, 09:27:47 AM

How about you send me a sizable piece of perfectly flat glass that is 2m by 2m and I will place a level on it and I will see if its perfectly flat.  If it is I will give you 5 British Pounds.

Berny
Needs a new window.

Why don't you just use that £5 to buy some glass from them? 

What?!  The Glass is going to cost way more than that!  I'll let someone else pay for it and then they can collect the prize!  Yeah as if I am going to pay for that.

Berny
As if I would pay for soething myself

I have already explained this about five times. I'm not going to do it again because you cannot read or retain information. Please re-read the thread again.

Re-read some pages back, no explanation. Only saying "because it is so", "it 's because of gravity", "it's more affected therefore it's bulged". Absolutely no explanations. As I said, stating laws of gravity no explanation. It seems that you don't understand what you are talking about.

AAAAGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!. Its this ground hog thread again.

It is nothing to do with advertising. Its flat!

Where is your measuring data about that or statements from these glass production engineers? I thought so, you haven't any, only public information pamphlet which says - it is flat.

Explaining how laws of gravity prove my point is not explaining? 

Explaining how laws of gravity prove my point is not explaining? 

In what way it is? I have no problem with gravity, I wanted to know how the water bulges in the point where the gravity is stronger. Your only explanation so far is "because it is stronger there". It really doesn't say anything, because there isn't only the gravity in play and if the gravity overcomes the surface tension then the surface flattens, not bulges.

Explaining how laws of gravity prove my point is not explaining? 

You also might want to learn scale in terms of circumference to understand how moronic that argument really is.. Especially when the float glass gets bent vertically in the process line. All it takes is for a moron to understand what a level is in order to understand their failure here in this argument.  Are you telling us EG that you are as dumb as Thork is? It wouldn't surprise me in the least btw.

Newton's Universal Law of Gravity describes how gravitation behaves in RET, yes.

Quote

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that every massive particle in the universe attracts every other massive particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Since this detail became a trolling lame excuse, we now have to be very precise with the words said to trolls:

Gravitation does not behave as Newton's laws say in RET. Gravitation does behave as Newton's laws say in most cases in real science.

At least one troll wants to associate RET with the Hollow Earth hogwash, and a hollow Earth is impossible according to Newton's laws.

Those of us who are here trying to show how real science works should avoid the "RET" name, since the idea of a flat Earth is not in fact contrary other shapes of Earth, it is against all the scientists of the last 400 years or more and their work.

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

Except for the fact that the molten tin bath is usually 50 metres long, not half a kilometre.  Also the molten glass is then formed by rollers to finalize thickness and width.  It still has a second stage to go throw, a second kiln to cool slowly before finally it is cut by machines.  This method proves neither flat earth or round earth.
Nor as Thork said - it is not "perfect".  For more precise applications a process called overflow downdraft method is used developed by Corning.

Berny
home from work

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

A) Yes it does, you can't make something curve on a flat surface, you could have a straight line boundary extending to positive and negative infinity value from the tangent of a circle, even if that circle has gravity, or some attractive force, you still can't make something pass the boundary.
B)  From anyone's usually perspective the oceans do look flat.  What are you talking about?

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 30, 2010, 09:25:54 PM

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

A) Yes it does, you can't make something curve on a flat surface, you could have a straight line boundary extending to positive and negative infinity value from the tangent of a circle, even if that circle has gravity, or some attractive force, you still can't make something pass the boundary.
B)  From anyone's usually perspective the oceans do look flat.  What are you talking about?

Just to be clear, Thork screws up math often. Here he incorrectly assumes a linear function for the curve of the Earth, a sophomoric mistake.

The OP relied on a contested math formula so this conversation is going no where since the last 3 pages. This thread needs to die in peace.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 30, 2010, 09:25:54 PM

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

A) Yes it does, you can't make something curve on a flat surface, you could have a straight line boundary extending to positive and negative infinity value from the tangent of a circle, even if that circle has gravity, or some attractive force, you still can't make something pass the boundary.
B)  From anyone's usually perspective the oceans do look flat.  What are you talking about?

A) I didn't state that it would curve through the material it is sitting on. It bulges outwards to follow the curvature of the Earth.
B) So are you saying that oceans actually are flat? If so, thanks for a FE VICTORY!!!. If not, then your entire answer was pointless. Once again, if you are saying that liquids will be flat if on a relatively flat surface, than you are saying that all of the oceans should be flat.

Quote from: lowball on October 31, 2010, 03:22:06 AM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 30, 2010, 09:25:54 PM

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

Quote from: Thork on September 16, 2010, 04:37:02 PM

I'll come out with it. I'm pro-flat earth. However I would like to know how the round-earthers explain the manufacture of industrial flat glass, using the float process?

http://www.britglass.org.uk/Files/form2Float_Process.pdf
Let me draw your attention to page 5, Stage 5 Inspection.
"The float process is renowned for making perfectly flat, flaw-free glass"

If the earth is round, how do you make a perfectly flat flaw-free piece of glass using a "mirror-like surface of molten tin" , especially when "A float line can be nearly half a kilometre long.". Surely a round earth would put a curve in the glass and it would not be "Perfectly flat, flaw-free glass".

Look at the lengths these guys go to to get flat glass. 100 million inspection measurements a second! Surely they would work out all their glass curved? Unless the earth was flat of course.

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?

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

A) Yes it does, you can't make something curve on a flat surface, you could have a straight line boundary extending to positive and negative infinity value from the tangent of a circle, even if that circle has gravity, or some attractive force, you still can't make something pass the boundary.
B)  From anyone's usually perspective the oceans do look flat.  What are you talking about?

A) I didn't state that it would curve through the material it is sitting on. It bulges outwards to follow the curvature of the Earth.
B) So are you saying that oceans actually are flat? If so, thanks for a FE VICTORY!!!. If not, then your entire answer was pointless. Once again, if you are saying that liquids will be flat if on a relatively flat surface, than you are saying that all of the oceans should be flat.

A) Gravity does not repel, therefore the first statement does not work... for that to happen you would need a force called anti-gravity applying force specifically on the center portion of a piece of glass, that just doesn't happen.  While anti-gravity is believed by physicists to exist, it only existed for billionths of a second after the big bang, and has not been scientifically proven.

B)  I am not not at all saying the oceans are flat, the average viewing distance for a person is about 20 miles max under great conditions.  This is not enough to see the curvature of the Earth, people thought the Earth was flat hundreds of years ago because of this fact.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 31, 2010, 10:13:32 AM

Quote from: lowball on October 31, 2010, 03:22:06 AM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 30, 2010, 09:25:54 PM

Quote from: lowball on October 30, 2010, 09:24:12 PM

The surface of the ground will not be flat either way no matter where you are on the surface of the Earth, that is why building foundations are built, to compensate for this. 

Are you trying to say that there is some conspiracy behind glass manufacturing?

It doesn't matter if it is on a flat platform. If the liquid will still curve to follow the curvature of the Earth due to gravity. If this weren't true, then in Round Earth, we'd be seeing flat oceans wouldn't we?

A) Yes it does, you can't make something curve on a flat surface, you could have a straight line boundary extending to positive and negative infinity value from the tangent of a circle, even if that circle has gravity, or some attractive force, you still can't make something pass the boundary.
B)  From anyone's usually perspective the oceans do look flat.  What are you talking about?

A) I didn't state that it would curve through the material it is sitting on. It bulges outwards to follow the curvature of the Earth.
B) So are you saying that oceans actually are flat? If so, thanks for a FE VICTORY!!!. If not, then your entire answer was pointless. Once again, if you are saying that liquids will be flat if on a relatively flat surface, than you are saying that all of the oceans should be flat.

A) Gravity does not repel, therefore the first statement does not work... for that to happen you would need a force called anti-gravity applying force specifically on the center portion of a piece of glass, that just doesn't happen.  While anti-gravity is believed by physicists to exist, it only existed for billionths of a second after the big bang, and has not been scientifically proven.

B)  I am not not at all saying the oceans are flat, the average viewing distance for a person is about 20 miles max under great conditions.  This is not enough to see the curvature of the Earth, people thought the Earth was flat hundreds of years ago because of this fact.

A) I never suggested that gravity repels. Consider this diagram. (Blue is water, green is the Earth)


Even though the water is in a flat container, it is going to form curvature to match to Earth due to gravity pulling on it. Liquids are going to act like this where ever they are. A liquid is going to form curvature so that gravity will have an equal pull on it's surface at all points.

B) What are you posting is completely irrelevant and pointless to whether or not there would be curvature in the oceans in RET. Are you going to make a point?

B) So are you saying that oceans actually are flat? If so, thanks for a FE VICTORY!!!. If not, then your entire answer was pointless.

It's not the FE victory but go to the beach and do you see any curvature there? No.

Once again, if you are saying that liquids will be flat if on a relatively flat surface, than you are saying that all of the oceans should be flat.

Don't make that comparison. Little puddle versus ocean. Oceans are not in the relatively flat surface. They are on a curved surface. Take the scale also into account.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 31, 2010, 10:13:32 AM

B) So are you saying that oceans actually are flat? If so, thanks for a FE VICTORY!!!. If not, then your entire answer was pointless.

It's not the FE victory but go to the beach and do you see any curvature there? No.

This makes no sense.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on October 31, 2010, 10:13:32 AM

Once again, if you are saying that liquids will be flat if on a relatively flat surface, than you are saying that all of the oceans should be flat.

Don't make that comparison. Little puddle versus ocean. Oceans are not in the relatively flat surface. They are on a curved surface. Take the scale also into account.

Consider the diagram you posted that I used above. There is no curved surface there. Is the diagram incorrect?