Electromagnetic Acceleration

  • 13 Replies
  • 3439 Views
?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Electromagnetic Acceleration
« on: March 12, 2011, 04:12:02 PM »
04/17/2011 EDIT:  I will not be able to continue this thread as I am removing myself from this forum:
theflatearthsociety.org > Other > Discussion Boards > The Lounge > Farewell.

==============================================================

This question is in reference to the following formula:



As found in http://theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Electromagnetic+Accelerator

As a side note, I've also read the article on Optics here: http://theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Optics

I'm trying to wrap my mind around this formula, but I'm used to dealing with a clear Cartesian graph where x is the horizontal component and y is the vertical component.

In this article, x and y are described as:

Quote
x, y - co-ordinates in the plane of the light ray, where y is increasing in the direction of fastest decreasing Dark Energy potential, and x is increasing in the direction of the component of propagation of the ray which is perpendicular to y.

I'm not understanding what "direction of fastest decreasing Dark Energy potential" means.

Can someone explain what this is and give me a conceptual idea of how it works... or otherwise point me in the right direction (hopefully where I'm not sifting through 100's of irrelevant responses and pages of meaningless forum banter that is often off topic).
« Last Edit: April 17, 2011, 01:19:46 PM by Oracle »

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8781
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2011, 04:41:22 PM »
I can't think of a single believer who ascribes to it. I'd address your concerns to the originator of the theory.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2011, 04:45:24 PM »
Nothing electromagnetic can accelerate by definition. If something is electromagnetic then it stays still and the world moves around it. This is called the equivalence principle invented by Albert Einstein.

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2011, 04:54:05 PM »
Nothing electromagnetic can accelerate by definition. If something is electromagnetic then it stays still and the world moves around it. This is called the equivalence principle invented by Albert Einstein.

Then by that same equivalence principle, I should be able to view this in any way that is equivalent in order to distill a mathematical expression that can predict the phenomena proposed by the upward curvature of horizontal light to provide the illusion of falling below the horizon.

As long as I get an explanation of the x and y coordinates as used in this system, I'll be happy.  Thanks, but your reply is not helpful to my question.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2011, 10:16:24 PM »
I'm not understanding what "direction of fastest decreasing Dark Energy potential" means.

It means exactly what it says. Dark Energy, the force which accelerates matter and electromagnetic radiation throughout the known universe, has associated potential just like any other force. The quoted phrase refers to the direction in which that potential decreases more quickly per unit distance than any other direction.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2011, 10:34:43 PM »
I'm not understanding what "direction of fastest decreasing Dark Energy potential" means.

It means exactly what it says. Dark Energy, the force which accelerates matter and electromagnetic radiation throughout the known universe, has associated potential just like any other force. The quoted phrase refers to the direction in which that potential decreases more quickly per unit distance than any other direction.

So... that would be upward relative to the earth plain?

I mean... if dark energy is responsible for a constant upward universal acceleration then it stands to reason that upward is the direction of increasing kinetic dark energy, or decreasing potential dark energy.

Does dark energy act in any direction other than vertically and perpendicular to the earth plane?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2011, 10:45:21 PM »
No.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2011, 07:06:33 AM »
Nothing electromagnetic can accelerate by definition. If something is electromagnetic then it stays still and the world moves around it. This is called the equivalence principle invented by Albert Einstein.

Then by that same equivalence principle, I should be able to view this in any way that is equivalent in order to distill a mathematical expression that can predict the phenomena proposed by the upward curvature of horizontal light to provide the illusion of falling below the horizon.

As long as I get an explanation of the x and y coordinates as used in this system, I'll be happy.  Thanks, but your reply is not helpful to my question.
Assuming you understand that the equivalency principal was A) improved by Einstein, and B) has nothing to do with electromagnetism, you'll discover very quickly that Crusty is a troll.

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2011, 08:48:44 AM »
No.

That was unbelievably unhelpful, why do you bother to respond if you aren't going to bother to contribute?

I'm not understanding what "direction of fastest decreasing Dark Energy potential" means.

It means exactly what it says. Dark Energy, the force which accelerates matter and electromagnetic radiation throughout the known universe, has associated potential just like any other force. The quoted phrase refers to the direction in which that potential decreases more quickly per unit distance than any other direction.

How do you determine the direction in which potential dark energy decreases more quickly per unit distance?

Let's just assume for the moment that I might be somewhat new to this site, and that perhaps, just perhaps... I have no idea what the intricacies of this DE is much beyond what it says in the FAQ or how it is supposed to work with UA and EA.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2011, 01:38:11 PM »
How do you determine the direction in which potential dark energy decreases more quickly per unit distance?

The same way one determines it for any other force.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2011, 01:53:01 PM »
How do you determine the direction in which potential dark energy decreases more quickly per unit distance?

The same way one determines it for any other force.

Is it impossible to get a straight answer?

My Dark Energy Compass is broken....

Ok, then I'm going to have to go under the assumption that y is the vertical component, since that is the apparent direction of UA, and by the equivalence principle, the apparent direction is sufficient for calculations within my own inertial frame of reference.

If this is an incorrect assumption, then please explain in great detail why it is inaccurate, or point me to some literature that will help clarify DE, UA, and EA in detail for me.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2011, 02:02:32 PM by Oracle »

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2011, 02:57:31 PM »
Just a few of observations...

First, B has to be a measure of acceleration, otherwise the units for distance do not come out right.

Second, this formula looks very similar to an inverse function for the volume of a Sphere, where:

V = 4/3 * pi * r3
-and-
V-1 = 3/4 * 1/pi * r-3
V-1 = 3/4 * {r * pi2}-3

That is... if you let:
r * pi2 = Bx4 / c2

But then... you'd be treating an Inverse Volume as a Distance... and the units wouldn't come out right if you did.

Third, since the Sun is ALWAYS at a constant height (3000 miles) the y component must refer to the variable height of the observer, and not of the object viewed, otherwise there would be no change in the x component over distance to account for the apparent upward curvature of light... at least when it is the sun that is being viewed at a distance.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2011, 03:20:52 PM by Oracle »

?

Oracle

  • 633
  • RE'er with an open, but critical, mind.
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2011, 04:12:16 PM »
Diameter of Flat Earth: 24,900 miles (Radius: 12,450 miles)
Solar path Radius at equinox: 6,225 miles
Approximate deviation between solstices: +/- 1615.6 miles
Height of Sun: 3,000 miles
Diameter of Sun: 32 miles (Radius: 16 miles)

Scenario: During the equinox, when an observer stands upon the equator, at precisely 6am and 6pm solar time, the observer will be exactly halfway through either a sunrise or a sunset at sea level.

Objective: Using the above information, determine the upward curvature of light to observe this phenomena.

Linear distance from observer to the point at sea level on the earth that the sun is directly over at this time:
Since this forms a right isosceles triangle with the north pole, this distance is merely the square root of twice the Solar path Radius at equinox squared.

D12 = (6,225 mi)2 + (6,225 mi)2
D12 = 77,501,250 mi2
D1 = 8803.4794258 mi

The Height of the sun is fixed at: D2 = 3000 mi

The linear distance to the center-point of the sun would then be:
D32 = D12 + D22
D32 = 77,501,250 mi2 + 9.000.000 mi2
D32 = 86,501,250 mi2
D3 = 9300.6048190 mi

The center-point light from the sun should be intersecting and almost horizontal with the earth at the point of the observer at sea level.

It should be noted that there should be increasing upward curvature with increasing elevation of the observer above sea level, allowing a fuller view of the sun at the horizon, while significantly moving horizontally closer or further from the sun will likewise impact the view.

Based on these angles, the sun should appear directly in the NE on sunrise and NW on sunset at the equator on the equinox.  Since we know this is not true and the sun is instead viewed directly in the E and W respectively, there would also need to be some horizontal curvature of light to the observer as well. This curvature would be less pronounced at the North Pole and more exaggerated at the rim in order to maintain this effect world wide.

I'll have to consider this some more when I have more time...
« Last Edit: March 13, 2011, 05:17:05 PM by Oracle »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 43120
Re: Electromagnetic Acceleration
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2011, 05:08:15 PM »
How do you determine the direction in which potential dark energy decreases more quickly per unit distance?

The same way one determines it for any other force.

Is it impossible to get a straight answer?

From Parsifal?  Pretty much, yes.
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.