Disproven Flat Earth theories.

  • 111 Replies
  • 26258 Views
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #90 on: May 11, 2011, 01:41:13 PM »
Seems to be some confusion here about my question. I was questioning the need for a 'particle' to explain the effect of gravity.

I am not a pysicist.



?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #91 on: May 13, 2011, 03:53:07 PM »
Seems to be some confusion here about my question. I was questioning the need for a 'particle' to explain the effect of gravity.

I am not a pysicist.

The game that FE'ers play uses the fact that the word "explain" has at least two meanings:
  • give a convincing story (as in "communism is the best system because no effort is wasted competing"), which is the common language meaning
  • give enough information to make predictions possible, which is the meaning given by scientists.

Science does not need to say whether a particle, a wave or an unknown phenomenon is the cause of gravity. Science has to show that reliable predictions are possible using the current concept of gravity and the equations of Newton (or if you want, the General Relativity). And science has done that in uncountable scenarios, always getting good predictions in cases of speeds not too close to the speed of light and distances smaller than galaxies.

On the contrary, FE'ers want to give you a convincing story: "if I do not see the particle that transmits gravity, gravity is part of a conspiracy!" As you can see, it is not as convincing as they think.

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #92 on: June 03, 2011, 08:13:44 PM »
So the burden of excessive time and cost to do YOUR experiment is mine alone in order to prove to myself something that I already know: "that bananas do in fact exhibit a gravitational pull toward each other" ... and I expect you to take my word on the veracity of those results, why?  You have no reason to take my word for it if my results do show a gravitational, and so I have nothing to prove to you.
Right back at you. I see no reason why I'd waste my time trying to prove anything to you. I'm just suggesting that you stop being cocky about what you haven't confirmed.

Ok, fine, I just dropped a banana to the earth, and another banana to the earth.  they both have mass and are both attracted to the earth by a common gravitational pull to the earth, from this, I can extrapolate that since both banana's have mass themselves and that mass has been found to be one of the primary components that determines a gravitational pull, that these 2 banana's do exhibit a gravitational pull (albeit minute) on each other.

That experiment satisfies my sensibilities, and I see no need to go any further. *Done*

The pound force of attraction between the 2 bananas is this:

{Weight of banana1} * {Weight of banana2} / {Weight of the Earth based on mass}

Assuming an average banana weight of about 1 lb.

And assuming the weight of the earth at around 13,200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 lbs.

That brings these bananas to have an attractive pound force of about 1/(1.32 * 1025 lbs. toward each other....

or about:
0.00000000000000000000000007575757575... lbs
= 7.575757575... * 10-26 lbs

This is, of course, when the banana's are in direct contact with each other, as they move further apart, that force drops off exponentially.
Gravity decreases with distance that's the gravitational force at 6000km the force at 20cm with be 10^15 times stronger, but still very weak.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #93 on: June 05, 2011, 01:32:29 AM »
... are you even thinking this through at all?

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

Ok, how about this. A skydiver jumps out of a plane high in the sky, how can there be UA if a person reaches their terminal velocity and maintains a speed until they release their parachute? Wouldn't UA make the earth 'catch up' much faster?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #94 on: June 05, 2011, 10:19:11 AM »
... are you even thinking this through at all?

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

Ok, how about this. A skydiver jumps out of a plane high in the sky, how can there be UA if a person reaches their terminal velocity and maintains a speed until they release their parachute? Wouldn't UA make the earth 'catch up' much faster?

No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #95 on: June 05, 2011, 07:07:15 PM »
No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.

Please elaborate.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #96 on: June 05, 2011, 07:08:19 PM »
No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.

Please elaborate.

I'm sorry, do you not understand the concept of drag?  Try wikipedia.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #97 on: June 05, 2011, 07:12:10 PM »
Air is matter, and thus causes drag.

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #98 on: June 05, 2011, 09:09:03 PM »
... are you even thinking this through at all?

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

Ok, how about this. A skydiver jumps out of a plane high in the sky, how can there be UA if a person reaches their terminal velocity and maintains a speed until they release their parachute? Wouldn't UA make the earth 'catch up' much faster?
Your in an large box, you feel a force that feels like gravity, how do you tell whether the box is either on the ground of a planet of in space being accelerated by thrusters. This is a thought experiment made up by Einstein.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #99 on: June 06, 2011, 10:47:53 AM »
No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.

Please elaborate.

I'm sorry, do you not understand the concept of drag?  Try wikipedia.
Real mature, I don't remember disrespecting you, why the animosity? I meant, how would the drag be the same if the earth is accelerating? I suppose if you mean the air is also rushing up and accelerating at the same constant. My point is, the longer you're in the air, the more speed the earth is picking up. Even with drag, you'd still notice a decrease in time to reach the earth. Since earth's gravity in RET is, more or less, a 'constant', terminal velocity is a predictable value, but if UA is increasing at a fixed rate, shouldn't the earth still 'catch up' faster, regardless of air resistance?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #100 on: June 06, 2011, 12:26:25 PM »
No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.

Please elaborate.

I'm sorry, do you not understand the concept of drag?  Try wikipedia.
Real mature, I don't remember disrespecting you, why the animosity? I meant, how would the drag be the same if the earth is accelerating? I suppose if you mean the air is also rushing up and accelerating at the same constant. My point is, the longer you're in the air, the more speed the earth is picking up. Even with drag, you'd still notice a decrease in time to reach the earth. Since earth's gravity in RET is, more or less, a 'constant', terminal velocity is a predictable value, but if UA is increasing at a fixed rate, shouldn't the earth still 'catch up' faster, regardless of air resistance?

No, the rate at which you fall due to gravity in the RE model is exactly the same as the rate the Earth accelerates upwards in the FE model.  There is no discrepancy and terminal velocity works the same in both models.

And I'm not sure where you saw animosity.  I was trying to help you understand.  :-\

For more info, look up the equivalence principle.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #101 on: June 06, 2011, 12:38:59 PM »
No, because the skydiver's fall is equally affected by the force of drag in both models.

Please elaborate.

I'm sorry, do you not understand the concept of drag?  Try wikipedia.
Real mature, I don't remember disrespecting you, why the animosity? I meant, how would the drag be the same if the earth is accelerating? I suppose if you mean the air is also rushing up and accelerating at the same constant. My point is, the longer you're in the air, the more speed the earth is picking up. Even with drag, you'd still notice a decrease in time to reach the earth. Since earth's gravity in RET is, more or less, a 'constant', terminal velocity is a predictable value, but if UA is increasing at a fixed rate, shouldn't the earth still 'catch up' faster, regardless of air resistance?

Calm down. As a matter of fact, this was one of the first questions I asked when I was new here.  Actually, I used even used skydiving as my example. You see, the air hitting you would cause you to move up as the earth closes in on you.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #102 on: June 06, 2011, 05:15:25 PM »
Pretty much when the Earth is accelerating upwards, it is pushing air along with it. That air gets pushed into you, which means you do not approach the Earth as fast.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #103 on: July 06, 2011, 12:04:59 PM »

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

I hate to bump this thread, but...
Wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will cover the 10 meters in .1 second (technically less, since it's accelerating). You're confusing acceleration with velocity.

d = 1/2at2 + vit
d = 1/2 (10) (t2) + 100(t)
d = 5t2 + 100t
10 = 5t2 + 100t
2 = t2 + 20t
t2 + 20t - 2 = 0
t = (-20 + sqrt(400+8))/2
t ~ (-20 + 20.1990099)/2
t ~ .1990099/2
t ~ 0.09950495 s
This value is not even close to one second. Also, if the Earth is always accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2, then
a) wouldn't it eventually become impossible to jump? I mean, suppose that the Earth has been accelerating at this rate for even just a year. That's 31,536,000 seconds. The velocity would be 309368160 m/s. To jump, we would need to be able to accelerate at MORE than that speed. Impossible.
b) what would happen when it reached the speed of light?

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #104 on: July 06, 2011, 12:52:27 PM »

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

I hate to bump this thread, but...
Wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will cover the 10 meters in .1 second (technically less, since it's accelerating). You're confusing acceleration with velocity.

d = 1/2at2 + vit
d = 1/2 (10) (t2) + 100(t)
d = 5t2 + 100t
10 = 5t2 + 100t
2 = t2 + 20t
t2 + 20t - 2 = 0
t = (-20 + sqrt(400+8))/2
t ~ (-20 + 20.1990099)/2
t ~ .1990099/2
t ~ 0.09950495 s
This value is not even close to one second. Also, if the Earth is always accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2, then
a) wouldn't it eventually become impossible to jump? I mean, suppose that the Earth has been accelerating at this rate for even just a year. That's 31,536,000 seconds. The velocity would be 309368160 m/s. To jump, we would need to be able to accelerate at MORE than that speed. Impossible.
b) what would happen when it reached the speed of light?

Equivalence principle.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #105 on: July 06, 2011, 01:27:11 PM »

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

I hate to bump this thread, but...
Wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will cover the 10 meters in .1 second (technically less, since it's accelerating). You're confusing acceleration with velocity.

d = 1/2at2 + vit
d = 1/2 (10) (t2) + 100(t)
d = 5t2 + 100t
10 = 5t2 + 100t
2 = t2 + 20t
t2 + 20t - 2 = 0
t = (-20 + sqrt(400+8))/2
t ~ (-20 + 20.1990099)/2
t ~ .1990099/2
t ~ 0.09950495 s
This value is not even close to one second. Also, if the Earth is always accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2, then
a) wouldn't it eventually become impossible to jump? I mean, suppose that the Earth has been accelerating at this rate for even just a year. That's 31,536,000 seconds. The velocity would be 309368160 m/s. To jump, we would need to be able to accelerate at MORE than that speed. Impossible.
b) what would happen when it reached the speed of light?

Equivalence principle.

So you're saying that the apple would have a velocity of 100 m/s when it dropped?

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #106 on: July 06, 2011, 03:16:58 PM »

If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

I hate to bump this thread, but...
Wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will cover the 10 meters in .1 second (technically less, since it's accelerating). You're confusing acceleration with velocity.

d = 1/2at2 + vit
d = 1/2 (10) (t2) + 100(t)
d = 5t2 + 100t
10 = 5t2 + 100t
2 = t2 + 20t
t2 + 20t - 2 = 0
t = (-20 + sqrt(400+8))/2
t ~ (-20 + 20.1990099)/2
t ~ .1990099/2
t ~ 0.09950495 s
This value is not even close to one second. Also, if the Earth is always accelerating at 9.81 m/s^2, then
a) wouldn't it eventually become impossible to jump? I mean, suppose that the Earth has been accelerating at this rate for even just a year. That's 31,536,000 seconds. The velocity would be 309368160 m/s. To jump, we would need to be able to accelerate at MORE than that speed. Impossible.
b) what would happen when it reached the speed of light?

Equivalence principle.

So you're saying that the apple would have a velocity of 100 m/s when it dropped?

Relative to what?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9549
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #107 on: July 06, 2011, 05:36:12 PM »
a) wouldn't it eventually become impossible to jump? I mean, suppose that the Earth has been accelerating at this rate for even just a year. That's 31,536,000 seconds. The velocity would be 309368160 m/s. To jump, we would need to be able to accelerate at MORE than that speed. Impossible.

This is what told me you didn't understand how it works. You are being pushed along with the Earth, so you would be moving at that same velocity. It is no different than when you are on an airplane or car. Are you not capable of moving around and jumping? Why would you need to be able to accelerate at more than the speed of the Earth if you are already moving at the speed of the Earth.


If the apple is stationary on the Earth, than it is being accelerated by the Earth. The Earth is pushing along objects on the Earth, so they are accelerating at G as well.

For the sake of simple math, I am having G = 10m/s2

Lets say there are two apples on a tree handing about 10 meters above the ground. Just before the first apple falls, the Earth is moving at 100 m/s. This means that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and therefore the apples are too. Now the first apple falls. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. Now at that instant, the Earth is at 110m/s, the apple on the ground is moving at 110m/s, and the tree and the second apple hanging on it are moving at 110m/s. The second apple drops. It is no longer in contact with anything (besides a small cushion of air) so it is no longer accelerating at G. The Earth is accelerating at about 10 meters a second2, so it meets the apple, and it hits the ground in about one second. At that instant, the whole system is moving at 120m/s and is accelerating at G.

What are you confused about? The Earth is continuously accelerating, but that acceleration is constant.

I hate to bump this thread, but...
Wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will cover the 10 meters in .1 second (technically less, since it's accelerating). You're confusing acceleration with velocity.

d = 1/2at2 + vit
d = 1/2 (10) (t2) + 100(t)
d = 5t2 + 100t
10 = 5t2 + 100t
2 = t2 + 20t
t2 + 20t - 2 = 0
t = (-20 + sqrt(400+8))/2
t ~ (-20 + 20.1990099)/2
t ~ .1990099/2
t ~ 0.09950495 s
This value is not even close to one second.

You are incorrect. You are thinking about this thought experiment wrong. If the Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree, then the Earth will not cover the 10 meters in .1 second relative to the apple. The Earth is moving up at 100 m/s when the first apple detaches from the tree. The tree is attached to the Earth meaning that the tree is also moving at 100m/s, and accelerating at 10m/s. The apple is attached to the tree, so it also has the characteristics until it detaches. So if everything in the equation is moving at the same speed, how does one object approach another? One of the object's speed has to change. It is has to either accelerate or decelerate. So if the Earth is accelerating at 10m/s, it is going to take 1 second for the difference between the two objects 10 meters.



b) what would happen when it reached the speed of light?

When you look at equations from Special Relativity, you will find this will never happen. The relevant equation is v/c = tanh (at/c). Since tanh(at/c) is always less than 1, you can never reach the speed of light.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 10:24:19 PM by EnglshGentleman »

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #108 on: July 06, 2011, 07:20:15 PM »
People: right now, you aren't arguing with insane flat earthers, you're arguing with Albert Einstein. Keep that in mind.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #109 on: July 07, 2011, 04:27:01 PM »
People: right now, you aren't arguing with insane flat earthers, you're arguing with Albert Einstein. Keep that in mind.

No, we aren't. Einstein believed in a round earth.

Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #110 on: July 07, 2011, 04:40:33 PM »
People: right now, you aren't arguing with insane flat earthers, you're arguing with Albert Einstein. Keep that in mind.

No, we aren't. Einstein believed in a round earth.

But you're not arguing against a flat Earth, you're arguing against the equivalence principle. Which is arguing against Einstein. This part of FET is correct. An infinitely accelerating Earth would be indistinguishable from gravity in our frame of reference, and we would never reach the speed of light. (Which is some other law or something. Still part of Einstein's work.)
Quote from: Tom Bishop
If you don't know, whenever you talk about it you're invoking the supernatural
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Unknown != Magic.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: Disproven Flat Earth theories.
« Reply #111 on: July 07, 2011, 04:42:33 PM »
People: right now, you aren't arguing with insane flat earthers, you're arguing with Albert Einstein. Keep that in mind.

No, we aren't. Einstein believed in a round earth.

Irrelevant. You were arguing against his physics, not his belief concerning the world's shape. You're going to need everything spelled out for you, aren'tcha?

Ohh, Haru zee Ninja!
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.