Disproven Flat Earth theories.

Anything that claims there is no such thing as gravity.
Gravity is a scientifically obseved and confirmed phenomina. There are many experiments which prove this and as such it must be accounted for in any flat earth theory.


Infinite earth theories which deal with gravity can be easily disproven by observing wheather gravity drops as height increases (disccussed here http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=47374.0). Gravity measured at the summit of mount everest is confirmed as being lower than other locations of earth.


So, what flat earth theories don't fall under either of these categories.

gravity of banana was never shown

No one has discovered the Graviton particle the last time I checked.

gravity of banana was never shown

That's because no one bothered to sufficiently test it, and I, for one am not about to participate in a costly, tedious, and pointless experiment just to satisfy you.  If you want to do it, go ahead, get about 1000 pounds of bananas and put 500 pounds on each end of an accurate  torsion balance in a sealed glass room and observe from a distance whether or not there is a pull toward each other.

Concrete would be easier and cheaper than bananas on a pound for pound basis though....  but you seem to like the fruit, so by all means, go for it if you want, just remember to use a sufficient amount of banana mass for best results.

That's because no one bothered to sufficiently test it[...]

Incorrect and very convenient. "It's there, but I won't show it to you because uuuuuuhhhhh I don't feel like it".
If you do not wish to take the challenge, no one's forcing you. However, your laziness and/or ineptitude does not affect the challenge's validity.
In other words: Please come back when you become a serious person.

As for the OP:

Gravity is a scientifically obseved and confirmed phenomina.

Gravity is a scientifically confirmed phenomenon, yes. Gravitation is not. UA is an explanation of gravity on Earth other than (and equivalent to) gravitation.

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 11:13:38 AM

That's because no one bothered to sufficiently test it[...]

Incorrect and very convenient. "It's there, but I won't show it to you because uuuuuuhhhhh I don't feel like it".
If you do not wish to take the challenge, no one's forcing you. However, your laziness and/or ineptitude does not affect the challenge's validity.
In other words: Please come back when you become a serious person.

Why don't you take it more seriously and sufficiently test it yourself, instead of coming up with off the wall tests to prove something that has already been demonstrated with other materials.  If you are so certain that a banana does not exert a gravitational field, then why don't you demonstrate that yourself.  I have no reason to try and justify it to you.

Does you challenge come with a financial compensation to cover the cost of my time and the expense of my resources if i do this experiment?  If so, I will want a check up front and I will begin testing as soon as it clears... say $15,000 should be sufficient for me to conduct this experiment for you.

test it yourself

Proving a negative, eh, sir? You may want to visit a Creationist forum for that one. I reiterate my request to become a serious person.

Does you challenge come with a financial compensation to cover the cost of my time and the expense of my resources if i do this experiment?  If so, I will want a check up front and I will begin testing as soon as it clears... say $15,000 should be sufficient for me to conduct this experiment for you.

Ah, money extortion. Yes, I can see you truly are a globularist.

I'm a bit confused...I thought that the OP was essentially asking which FE theories do not rely on the non-existence of gravitation. So if we operate under the assumption that gravitation exists, which FE theories are still possible?

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 12:27:17 PM

test it yourself

Proving a negative, eh, sir? You may want to visit a Creationist forum for that one. I reiterate my request to become a serious person.

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 12:27:17 PM

Does you challenge come with a financial compensation to cover the cost of my time and the expense of my resources if i do this experiment?  If so, I will want a check up front and I will begin testing as soon as it clears... say $15,000 should be sufficient for me to conduct this experiment for you.

Ah, money extortion. Yes, I can see you truly are a globularist.

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.

And no, I do not expect you to prove the negative, I expect you to try and prove the positive with an honest experiment with a sufficient amount of banana mass, and IF by some chance, absolutely no attraction toward each other can be detected, THEN we might begin to consider that bananas do not exhibit a gravitational field.

It is a falsifiable experiment, it shouldn't be hard to show that bananas do or do not exhibit a gravitational field if done properly.  In fact you could compute out about how much banana mass you will need with the mass/gravity formulas in order to show a definite & satisfactory result... and just to be safe, you should double that banana mass, just to be sure.

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.

And no, I do not expect you to prove the negative

Yes, you do.

I'm a bit confused...I thought that the OP was essentially asking which FE theories do not rely on the non-existence of gravitation.

The OP doesn't ask. The OP boldly states that theories that rely on non-existence of gravitation are moot, and those that do not rely on it are also moot.

So if we operate under the assumption that gravitation exists, which FE theories are still possible?

The Davis model would be a good example.

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 01:27:33 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.

i think we're all missing the point here. gravity exists.

therefore the earth is not rising upwards at 9.8m/s²

and therefore the sun cannot be hovering 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

and therefore the earth cannot be flat.

i think we can safely shut this website down now.

i think we're all missing the point here. gravity exists.

therefore the earth is not rising upwards at 9.8m/s²

Proof? Last time I check the Graviton has yet to be discovered

Ah, money extortion. Yes, I can see you truly are a globularist.

I lol'd so hard.

Ok, fine, I just dropped a banana to the earth, and another banana to the earth.

Excellent. You've proven the compatibility of UA and gravity with bananas. Now, how's your gravitation experiment coming along?

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.

I have three glasses. Two of them contain apple juice, the other - petrol. I have drank the first two glasses and I feel fine. From this I can extrapolate that the third glass will be just as safe to drink, since all three glasses contain liquids and are made of glass.

To further visualise this:

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

No, the force of attraction between 2 bananas is 0N. I also urge you to use SI units if you're trying (or pretending) to discuss science.

It is not anyone's fault but your own that you refuse to purchase a measurement device sensitive enough to detect the gravitational force of a banana.

It is not anyone's fault but your own that you refuse to purchase a measurement device sensitive enough to detect the gravitational force of a banana.

It would be quite an imprecise device if it measured 0N as anything else than 0N.

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 01:59:50 PM

Ok, fine, I just dropped a banana to the earth, and another banana to the earth.

Excellent. You've proven the compatibility of UA and gravity with bananas. Now, how's your gravitation experiment coming along?

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 01:59:50 PM

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.

I have three glasses. Two of them contain apple juice, the other - petrol. I have drank the first two glasses and I feel fine. From this I can extrapolate that the third glass will be just as safe to drink, since all three glasses contain liquids and are made of glass.

To further visualise this:

The Earth*	bananas*

The difference is clear.
*-pictures not to scale

Quote from: Oracle on April 12, 2011, 01:59:50 PM

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

No, the force of attraction between 2 bananas is 0N. I also urge you to use SI units if you're trying (or pretending) to discuss science.

The experiment is complete enough to my satisfaction, since the earth is round and I already know gravity does exist.  If you have a problem with my experiment and results, it is up to you to devise and perform a sufficient way to refute it.  I'm quite satisfied with my own results, thank you.

The experiment is complete enough to my satisfaction, since the earth is round and I already know gravity does exist.  If you have a problem with my experiment and results, it is up to you to devise and perform a sufficient way to refute it.  I'm quite satisfied with my own results, thank you.

How is this an experiment? Did you observe and measure the distance traveled? You claim that they exerted a gravitational force on each other, but did you measure it? It is horrifying, and yet unsurprising the sort of things globularists accept as conclusive results.

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 12:58:33 PM

The experiment is complete enough to my satisfaction, since the earth is round and I already know gravity does exist.  If you have a problem with my experiment and results, it is up to you to devise and perform a sufficient way to refute it.  I'm quite satisfied with my own results, thank you.

How is this an experiment? Did you observe and measure the distance traveled? You claim that they exerted a gravitational force on each other, but did you measure it? It is horrifying, and yet unsurprising the sort of things globularists accept as conclusive results.

If you have a problem with me using an intermediary device to perform my calculations, then by all means, perform your own experiments... but based on my figures above... you are going to need a LOT of bananas to be able to measure a noticeable attraction toward each other.  I eagerly await your results.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on April 13, 2011, 01:03:43 PM

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 12:58:33 PM

The experiment is complete enough to my satisfaction, since the earth is round and I already know gravity does exist.  If you have a problem with my experiment and results, it is up to you to devise and perform a sufficient way to refute it.  I'm quite satisfied with my own results, thank you.

How is this an experiment? Did you observe and measure the distance traveled? You claim that they exerted a gravitational force on each other, but did you measure it? It is horrifying, and yet unsurprising the sort of things globularists accept as conclusive results.

If you have a problem with me using an intermediary device to perform my calculations, then by all means, perform your own experiments... but based on my figures above... you are going to need a LOT of bananas to be able to measure a noticeable attraction toward each other.  I eagerly await your results.

Ok, i just did an experiment.The equation to measure the attractive force, if there is one, between the bananas is

[Mass of Banana 1]/[Mass of Banana 2] * 0

Oh snap! It appears there is no attractive force.

I am satisfied with these results. It appears conclusive there was no force.

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 01:07:24 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on April 13, 2011, 01:03:43 PM

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 12:58:33 PM

The experiment is complete enough to my satisfaction, since the earth is round and I already know gravity does exist.  If you have a problem with my experiment and results, it is up to you to devise and perform a sufficient way to refute it.  I'm quite satisfied with my own results, thank you.

How is this an experiment? Did you observe and measure the distance traveled? You claim that they exerted a gravitational force on each other, but did you measure it? It is horrifying, and yet unsurprising the sort of things globularists accept as conclusive results.

If you have a problem with me using an intermediary device to perform my calculations, then by all means, perform your own experiments... but based on my figures above... you are going to need a LOT of bananas to be able to measure a noticeable attraction toward each other.  I eagerly await your results.

Ok, i just did an experiment.The equation to measure the attractive force, if there is one, between the bananas is

[Mass of Banana 1]/[Mass of Banana 2] * 0

Oh snap! It appears there is no attractive force.

I am satisfied with these results. It appears conclusive there was no force.

Interesting results, please explain your formula, because I'm not understanding the division of masses against each other, nor where your 0 constant was derived from... also you do not end up with a unit of force or acceleration at the end of your calculation.

Or are you just making crap up as you go and you are hoping just to BS your way through it?

Or are you just making crap up as you go and you are hoping just to BS your way through it?

Are we talking about my results, or yours? 

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 01:15:11 PM

Or are you just making crap up as you go and you are hoping just to BS your way through it?

Are we talking about my results, or yours?  

Yours, of course, mine at least provided a unit of force when I was done with my calculations and I can explain my thinking if you have any questions regarding my math.  Please let me know.

But seriously, how did you come up with that equation?

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on April 13, 2011, 01:36:10 PM

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 01:15:11 PM

Or are you just making crap up as you go and you are hoping just to BS your way through it?

Are we talking about my results, or yours?  

Yours, of course, mine at least provided a unit of force when I was done with my calculations and I can explain my thinking if you have any questions regarding my math.  Please let me know.

But seriously, how did you come up with that equation?

Somewhere along the lines of 1+1=1

Berny
1-1=1

Yours, of course, mine at least provided a unit of force when I was done with my calculations and I can explain my thinking if you have any questions regarding my math.  Please let me know.

Here's an equation for you:
F=gmM/Dongs
m - mass of banana 1 [kg]
M - mass of banana 2 [kg]
g - universal acceleration [m/s^2] = 9.81
Dongs - mass of an infinite amount of dog poo (constant) [kg] = +infinity

Oh snap, it's 0.

Now, let's do dimensional analysis:
kg*kg*m/(kg*s^2)=N
The units are right, therefore my equation must be right!

inb4 bullshit response: You randomly chose to divide everything by the mass of the Earth. I chose infinity instead.

Quote from: Oracle on April 13, 2011, 01:53:56 PM

Yours, of course, mine at least provided a unit of force when I was done with my calculations and I can explain my thinking if you have any questions regarding my math.  Please let me know.

Here's an equation for you:
F=gmM/Dongs
m - mass of banana 1 [kg]
M - mass of banana 2 [kg]
g - universal acceleration [m/s^2] = 9.81
Dongs - mass of an infinite amount of dog poo (constant) [kg] = +infinity

Oh snap, it's 0.

Now, let's do dimensional analysis:
kg*kg*m/(kg*s^2)=N
The units are right, therefore my equation must be right!

inb4 bullshit response: You randomly chose to divide everything by the mass of the Earth. I chose infinity instead.

why divide by dongs?
what is s?
and what is this equation measuring? the force of what?

why divide by dongs?

Why not?

what is s?

Seconds, the SI unit of time

and what is this equation measuring? the force of what?

The attractive force between two bananas, obviously. That's what we're discussing. What made you think it might be anything else?

Anything that claims there is no such thing as gravity.
Gravity is a scientifically obseved and confirmed phenomina. There are many experiments which prove this and as such it must be accounted for in any flat earth theory.


Infinite earth theories which deal with gravity can be easily disproven by observing wheather gravity drops as height increases (disccussed here http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=47374.0). Gravity measured at the summit of mount everest is confirmed as being lower than other locations of earth.


So, what flat earth theories don't fall under either of these categories.

Its lower because there is less local non-uniform mass when you are at the top of a mountain.  You are also closer to the heavens which have a gravitational pull.  

By careful measuring and interpretation of gravimetric data including local geography and the pull of the heavens you will see gravitational pull does NOT decrease with altitude.  To account for the heavens there are several indirect methods of testing its pull, including use of examining the Coriolis force.

Quote from: Demouse on April 11, 2011, 08:17:04 PM

Anything that claims there is no such thing as gravity.
Gravity is a scientifically obseved and confirmed phenomina. There are many experiments which prove this and as such it must be accounted for in any flat earth theory.


Infinite earth theories which deal with gravity can be easily disproven by observing wheather gravity drops as height increases (disccussed here http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=47374.0). Gravity measured at the summit of mount everest is confirmed as being lower than other locations of earth.


So, what flat earth theories don't fall under either of these categories.

Its lower because there is less local non-uniform mass when you are at the top of a mountain.  You are also closer to the heavens which have a gravitational pull.  

By careful measuring and interpretation of gravimetric data including local geography and the pull of the heavens you will see gravitational pull does NOT decrease with altitude.  To account for the heavens there are several indirect methods of testing its pull, including use of examining the Coriolis force.

You keep saying this, I look forward to the day you actually demonstrate it.

Quote from: John Davis on April 14, 2011, 04:02:15 AM

Quote from: Demouse on April 11, 2011, 08:17:04 PM

Anything that claims there is no such thing as gravity.
Gravity is a scientifically obseved and confirmed phenomina. There are many experiments which prove this and as such it must be accounted for in any flat earth theory.


Infinite earth theories which deal with gravity can be easily disproven by observing wheather gravity drops as height increases (disccussed here http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=47374.0). Gravity measured at the summit of mount everest is confirmed as being lower than other locations of earth.


So, what flat earth theories don't fall under either of these categories.

Its lower because there is less local non-uniform mass when you are at the top of a mountain.  You are also closer to the heavens which have a gravitational pull.  

By careful measuring and interpretation of gravimetric data including local geography and the pull of the heavens you will see gravitational pull does NOT decrease with altitude.  To account for the heavens there are several indirect methods of testing its pull, including use of examining the Coriolis force.

You keep saying this, I look forward to the day you actually demonstrate it.

But, you see, he already added an additional unknown variable, giving himself the possibility to assign whatever he wants to one of them (the gravitational pull) and decide that whatever is remaining goes to the other (the gravitational pull from the heavens). This way he can say that any measurement made, by whoever and with whatever equipment, fits his particular hypothesis.

Also, the gravitational pull on the top of high mountains is higher, not lower than at sea level with no mountain ranges close by. The gravitational pull is lower if measured from a high flying plane or a satellite, for example, but the mountain range has its own significant gravitational pull and increases the total pull seen on the top. You can see this in the gravitational surveys done for all of Earth.