# Can anyone answer this question.

• 908 Replies
• 87981 Views

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2013, 03:13:41 AM »
How about explaining it in kindergarten type stuff then, instead of putting out stupid numbers.
I'm asking a basic question, so answer it with a simple basic answer, I don't need all this number clap trap.

My question is:
What dissipates the heat once it immediately emits from the sun in one direction, as in earth.

Try this: get a balloon, blow it up a little bit, draw a square on it with sides of 1cm. Now blow the balloon up to twice it's size and measure the square. It should be about 2cm each side, with a total area of 4cm2. If you can't get your head around that, then I fear there may be no hope for you.
We aren't blowing balloons up. Can you not answer the question?

#### Cartesian

• 1965
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #31 on: October 14, 2013, 03:27:30 AM »

Let's assume that the earth is what you roundies say it is and everything is how you say it is, EXCEPT, the sun.
Instead of the sun being as big as it is, let us assume that the sun is only 20,000 miles in diameter. How much of the earth would it light up as opposed to what it's supposed to be doing right now?

That size is  smaller than Jupiter. It wouldn't create enough pressure to start a nuclear fusion.
I think, therefore I am

?

#### Scintific Method

• 1448
• Trust, but verify.
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2013, 03:28:16 AM »
Does this help?

The energy doesn't come out like a million mile wide pancake like you think it does, holding together all the way to the earth. It's more like the pieces of shrapnel from an explosion, expanding away from the centre. Kind of like the pieces of this cement truck:

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Mythbusters - Cement Truck Explosion
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #33 on: October 14, 2013, 04:32:22 AM »
If the sun was a cement truck in atmosphere, I'd go along with what you are saying.
The fact is though, your sun as we are told, is in a VACUUM in space and is 1 million km plus, in diameter as we see it, or as we are told.
It's also a nuclear BALL of fusion, as we are told.
It radiates it's heat and light all over the universe, as we are told.
Nothing affects anything in motion in space, as we are told, so nothing should affect the radiated heat from the second it starts from your sun, all the way to earth.
Why you keep using air and an explosion is beyond me. The sun isn't exploding, it's nuclear fusion isn't it? or so we have been led to believe.

?

#### Scintific Method

• 1448
• Trust, but verify.
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #34 on: October 14, 2013, 04:43:08 AM »
If the sun was a cement truck in atmosphere, I'd go along with what you are saying.
The fact is though, your sun as we are told, is in a VACUUM in space and is 1 million km plus, in diameter as we see it, or as we are told.
It's also a nuclear BALL of fusion, as we are told.
It radiates it's heat and light all over the universe, as we are told.
Nothing affects anything in motion in space, as we are told, so nothing should affect the radiated heat from the second it starts from your sun, all the way to earth.
Why you keep using air and an explosion is beyond me. The sun isn't exploding, it's nuclear fusion isn't it? or so we have been led to believe.

What do you think happens if something explodes in a vacuum? Does it all go in one direction? Say our hypothetical object shatters into a million pieces, do 100 of those pieces all go one way, or do they spread out?
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2013, 05:29:12 AM »
If the sun was a cement truck in atmosphere, I'd go along with what you are saying.
The fact is though, your sun as we are told, is in a VACUUM in space and is 1 million km plus, in diameter as we see it, or as we are told.
It's also a nuclear BALL of fusion, as we are told.
It radiates it's heat and light all over the universe, as we are told.
Nothing affects anything in motion in space, as we are told, so nothing should affect the radiated heat from the second it starts from your sun, all the way to earth.
Why you keep using air and an explosion is beyond me. The sun isn't exploding, it's nuclear fusion isn't it? or so we have been led to believe.

What do you think happens if something explodes in a vacuum? Does it all go in one direction? Say our hypothetical object shatters into a million pieces, do 100 of those pieces all go one way, or do they spread out?
Let me try this again.
Your sun is not a bomb. It is not a cement truck filled with explosives.
Your sun, as you are told, is a NUCLEAR FUSION REACTOR.

Let me try and make this easier, going by the science that you go by.
A laser beam pointed at earth from 93 million miles away, SHOULD, according to your vacuum carry on, reach earth as the very same laser beam started, as long as it was constant.

As you all say, there's nothing to stop anything in motion in your vacuum and nothing to dissipate anything, so whichever way something travels, that's the course it travels, UNLESS some force gets in its way, as in your earth atmosphere on the spinning ball you believe in.

?

#### Scintific Method

• 1448
• Trust, but verify.
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #36 on: October 14, 2013, 05:59:59 AM »
This will be my final attempt to help you understand. If this fails, I will have to abandon you to your ignorance.

Let's follow two individual packets of energy (aka photons (since we are talking about RE physics, I'll use RE terminology)) on their journey from the sun, past the earth, to your point five times further away. When they leave the surface of the sun, these two photons are, for the sake of this explanation, 1 centimetre apart. By the time they have traveled from the sun to the distance at which the earth orbits, they have, while traveling in an uninterrupted straight line, moved apart so that the gap between them is now 458 metres. When they reach your proposed point five times further away from the sun, they have, while still moving in an uninterrupted straight line, moved further apart, so that the gap between them is now 2.3 kilometres.

Now, when I say straight line, I mean each photon is following it's own straight line, drawn from the centre of the sun to the point where that photon left the sun's surface. Picture their paths as following the spokes of a bicycle wheel and you'll have a rough idea of what I mean.
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #37 on: October 14, 2013, 06:09:48 AM »
This will be my final attempt to help you understand. If this fails, I will have to abandon you to your ignorance.

Let's follow two individual packets of energy (aka photons (since we are talking about RE physics, I'll use RE terminology)) on their journey from the sun, past the earth, to your point five times further away. When they leave the surface of the sun, these two photons are, for the sake of this explanation, 1 centimetre apart. By the time they have traveled from the sun to the distance at which the earth orbits, they have, while traveling in an uninterrupted straight line, moved apart so that the gap between them is now 458 metres. When they reach your proposed point five times further away from the sun, they have, while still moving in an uninterrupted straight line, moved further apart, so that the gap between them is now 2.3 kilometres.

Now, when I say straight line, I mean each photon is following it's own straight line, drawn from the centre of the sun to the point where that photon left the sun's surface. Picture their paths as following the spokes of a bicycle wheel and you'll have a rough idea of what I mean.
Why are they moving away? Are they tadpoles or something?

Do you seriously believe all this stuff or are you on the wind up?
I agree with one thing though. I think you are best just abandoning this thread, at least where I'm concerned, anyway.

?

#### hewholikespie

• 249
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #38 on: October 14, 2013, 08:59:10 AM »
The photons exited the sun at a minutely different angle. Over distance, this infinitesimal course difference adds up to quite a large distance.

The sun is not a focused energy emitter, it's emitting it in all directions, and while some of that energy will reach us regardless of the distance, a good portion of it passes us by entirely already, not because it's been deflected, but because it left the sun at ever so slightly the wrong angle to hit us. If we were further away, a smaller angle of energy actually hits the earth.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #39 on: October 14, 2013, 10:01:57 AM »
The photons exited the sun at a minutely different angle. Over distance, this infinitesimal course difference adds up to quite a large distance.

The sun is not a focused energy emitter, it's emitting it in all directions, and while some of that energy will reach us regardless of the distance, a good portion of it passes us by entirely already, not because it's been deflected, but because it left the sun at ever so slightly the wrong angle to hit us. If we were further away, a smaller angle of energy actually hits the earth.
Any particular reason why this huge suns rays does envelope the full earth as in, why don't we see a bright super earth covering light instead of the actual full sun in a small capacity. You know, a sun that you can obscure in front of your eyes with a penny?

?

#### hewholikespie

• 249
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #40 on: October 14, 2013, 10:33:11 AM »
The photons exited the sun at a minutely different angle. Over distance, this infinitesimal course difference adds up to quite a large distance.

The sun is not a focused energy emitter, it's emitting it in all directions, and while some of that energy will reach us regardless of the distance, a good portion of it passes us by entirely already, not because it's been deflected, but because it left the sun at ever so slightly the wrong angle to hit us. If we were further away, a smaller angle of energy actually hits the earth.
Any particular reason why this huge suns rays does envelope the full earth as in, why don't we see a bright super earth covering light instead of the actual full sun in a small capacity. You know, a sun that you can obscure in front of your eyes with a penny?

The same reason you can cover a Lighthouse's lamp- a good 10 foot lamp on most models- with your pinky. Distance and Perspective.

This is a different question than why most of the light of the sun misses us, of course.

Let's take an imaginary circle of Radius X and an arc on the circumference Y. X is variable, but Y is constant. The Length of Y can also be presented as a measurement of degrees on the circumference. As X gets larger and larger, Y stays the same, and the amount of the circle it takes up is smaller and smaller. That's what the inverse square law is. The farther away you go, the fewer degrees of the 'circle' of energy you take up, and so more energy just misses you.

A simple experiment to demonstrate this effect could be done with a simple sliding track, a few laser pointers in a rig on that track, and a screen at one end.

#### th3rm0m3t3r0

• At least 3 words, please.
• 4696
• It's SCIENCE!
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2013, 11:33:10 AM »

See how, even though this rhetorical 2 dimensional Sun is throwing off energy in every direction, only two of the lines hit Earth in my shitty diagram?

All of the other lines shoot off into space.

Stop ignoring the inverse square law.

I'll try to put it simply, all relative to my poor diagram.

Basically, the light from a single spherical source shoots off energy in every single possible direction.
Obviously, as shown by my poor diagram, not all of that light hits the Earth directly.
Even the light that hits the Earth is effected by the inverse square law.
As light and energy travel in a straight line from the center of the Sun, you could imagine, assuming a spherical Sun (or even a circle Sun), that you would not and could not have any parallel "energy lines".
As you increase distance from the light source to the target, it allows more time for the non-parallel "energy lines" to drift away from one another.
So, increasing distance results in less of the "energy lines" to hit the target object.
You could imagine that if you moved the Earth closer to the Sun that more "energy lines" would hit it, and the opposite if you moved it further away.

I'm not sure why you're trying to argue the inverse square law like it's some type of law that only exists on a round-Earth.

Lamps are effected by the inverse square law.
That's why you cant shine a flashlight from space and illuminate Venus.

I thought you were going to tell us why you were asking when you got your answer?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 11:36:23 AM by th3rm0m3t3r0 »

I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

?

#### 11cookeaw1

##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #42 on: October 15, 2013, 03:55:13 AM »
Imagine you divided \$100 between 2 people, each person would get \$50. Now imagine you divided \$100 between 4 people, each person would get \$25. Even though you gave out the same amount of money both times the second time each person got less money. As you get further and further away from the Sun the light from it spreads out more and is divided over a larger and larger area.
Imagine a source of light which gave off 1 watt. 1 meter away the light would be spread over a area of 4*pi or roughly 12.6 square meters. THe intensity would be roughly 0.08 watts per square meter. 2 meters away the light would be spread out over roughly 50.3 square meters. The intensity would be roughly 0.02 watts per square meter.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #43 on: October 15, 2013, 04:49:41 AM »
Thanks for the explanation fella's but I don't need them. I'm well aware of light spreading in an atmosphere, which is something you are using to try and prove it happens in space, in a MATTER LESS place.
I mean, I know that space does not exist, but this isn't the issue here, as I have to go by your assumptions that a vacuum can somehow make stuff travel and not only travel, but span out.

If your vacuum worked as you say then your sun would envelope the earth. Not by the small amount it does, but by a huge earth killing amount, because even if 10% of that so called sun hits, it's still over a 100, 000 km  diameter hit.

The same goes for your stars. If nothing stops anything in motion in a vacuum, then all your stars will send all their light and heat to the earth, only in the reality of what you lot are trying to push, they would bathe the earth once they reached it, all the billions or trillions of godzillions of them as they are all round are't they? Larger suns we are told.

The earth should be like a beacon or a sun itself with all that heat/light.
Of course. I know, we only see them as specks because of their distance, I know, I know.
You can't have it both ways though.
I mean, if nothing stops the light/heat, then nothing stops the light/heat...UNTIL another force acts upon that light/heat, which to us, would be good old oblate spheroid earth, but here we are laughing at it all and shouting, "come on you pesky huge suns out there, is that all you've got."

What kind of real magic stops all this. Ok, you can have your inverse square law. Just factor it in to the godzillions of other suns aiming their mammoth energy towards us as surely some from each must hit us and at the force it was ejected as there is nothing in space to cool it and what not, right?

Oh...and before you all go off on your, "oh look at scepti, he's uneducated and he doesn't know physics or science." Forget that, just give me it in laymans terms.

?

#### Antonio

• 379
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #44 on: October 15, 2013, 06:42:31 AM »
Go to your the shower, and take a glass.
Put the glass just under the nozzle and note the time to fill it.
Now, empty the glass and put it on the groud, staying  beneath the nozzle. Note the time again.
You should need more time to fill it.
How do you explain it ?

#### th3rm0m3t3r0

• At least 3 words, please.
• 4696
• It's SCIENCE!
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #45 on: October 15, 2013, 07:03:18 AM »
Thanks for the explanation fella's but I don't need them. I'm well aware of light spreading in an atmosphere, which is something you are using to try and prove it happens in space, in a MATTER LESS place.
I mean, I know that space does not exist, but this isn't the issue here, as I have to go by your assumptions that a vacuum can somehow make stuff travel and not only travel, but span out.
If you'd just listen, it's perfectly plausible in a vacuum.

If your vacuum worked as you say then your sun would envelope the earth. Not by the small amount it does, but by a huge earth killing amount, because even if 10% of that so called sun hits, it's still over a 100, 000 km  diameter hit.
The Earth receives around 0.000000045% of the Sun's energy.

The same goes for your stars. If nothing stops anything in motion in a vacuum, then all your stars will send all their light and heat to the earth, only in the reality of what you lot are trying to push, they would bathe the earth once they reached it, all the billions or trillions of godzillions of them as they are all round are't they? Larger suns we are told.

But, you're wrong again.
Please stop ignoring the inverse square law as a means to explain this.
If you'd educate yourself, it makes a whole lot of perfect sense.
It has nothing to do with the vacuum.
You can actually ignore the vacuum because the speed of light is a constant in a vacuum.
Not all of the stars energy effects us. They're spheroids. They scatter energy and light in every possible direction. Why would all of it just concentrate and beam straight to Earth?
Obviously, some very, very small amounts of light reach us from the stars because there is nothing to stop the light in a vacuum.
But, that's why we see them as tiny little flickers in the sky.

The earth should be like a beacon or a sun itself with all that heat/light.
Of course. I know, we only see them as specks because of their distance, I know, I know.
You can't have it both ways though.
I mean, if nothing stops the light/heat, then nothing stops the light/heat...UNTIL another force acts upon that light/heat, which to us, would be good old oblate spheroid earth, but here we are laughing at it all and shouting, "come on you pesky huge suns out there, is that all you've got."
Nothing stops it, which is why we receive the miniscule amount that we do and rightfully should.
We're not having it both ways.

What kind of real magic stops all this. Ok, you can have your inverse square law. Just factor it in to the godzillions of other suns aiming their mammoth energy towards us as surely some from each must hit us and at the force it was ejected as there is nothing in space to cool it and what not, right?

The stars aren't aiming their energy at us, though.
They're spherical.
It doesn't need to cool or slow down.
The energy is "hitting us" at the same speed it was released from the star.
There's just not a whole lot of it left due to the distance.

Oh...and before you all go off on your, "oh look at scepti, he's uneducated and he doesn't know physics or science." Forget that, just give me it in laymans terms.

I tried to explain it as simply as my ability would allow in my last post.
What's so hard to understand, I mean, really?

You're thinking is : There's nothing to stop light or energy in a vacuum, so all light and energy from all stars and the Sun must hit us 100%.
You're just wrong.
It's been clearly explained to you why.

There may be some inconsistencies with RE empirical fact, but this is not one of them.
Don't you think the people who come up with this stuff would have taken that into consideration?
Or are you just more observant than every trained expert in the space sciences?
« Last Edit: October 15, 2013, 07:07:03 AM by th3rm0m3t3r0 »

I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

?

#### Umurweird

• 796
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #46 on: October 15, 2013, 07:17:29 AM »
Quote
Forget that, just give me it in laymans terms.

Why bother? Even in laymans terms you fail to understand basic concepts.

You don't understand how things work in a vacuum. You don't understand the inverse square law. You don't understand that the sun is a sphere spraying light and energy in ALL directions.........which is why only a fraction hits Earth. And you obviously don't understand that if the distance were greater......a lesser fraction would then hit Earth.

You're ignorant. That is the only issue here.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

?

#### spaceman spiff

• 172
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #47 on: October 15, 2013, 07:55:44 AM »
Take some laser pointers and array them in an arc of circle. Now put a sheet of paper very close to them in a way that the outermost pointers point to the edges of the paper, so all the beams hit it. Now start to move away (or ask a friend to do it) from the pointers and keep counting how many beams hit the paper. Tell us what you find out (I hope we can all agree that the light of those pointers travel pretty much in a straight line for the distances involved here).

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #48 on: October 15, 2013, 09:08:00 AM »
Go to your the shower, and take a glass.
Put the glass just under the nozzle and note the time to fill it.
Now, empty the glass and put it on the groud, staying  beneath the nozzle. Note the time again.
You should need more time to fill it.
How do you explain it ?
Nozzle direction of perforations and water pressure in an atmosphere as well.
As I said earlier, I understand the direction with your sun being a ball of nuclear fusion allegedly and obviously in that fantasy world it would span out as it's a ball shooting out light, but as in the shower scenario, it's still going to bathe the earth  to hell and we should not see the sun as a small disc of light if it hits our eyes inside this vacuum that cannot weaken it, so we should basically see an earth blanket of sun, not a small disc.

?

#### Pyrolizard

• 699
• The Militant Skeptic
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #49 on: October 15, 2013, 09:15:37 AM »
It would seem to me that you're all trying to explain the inverse square law to scepti, when he's misunderstanding angular resolution.  I may be wrong, but there's my two cents for the last ten pages.
Quote from: Shmeggley
Wherever someone is wrong on the internet, Pyrolizard will be there!

Quote from: Excelsior John
Let it always be known that Excelsior John is against democracy.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #50 on: October 15, 2013, 09:30:46 AM »
Quote
Forget that, just give me it in laymans terms.

Why bother? Even in laymans terms you fail to understand basic concepts.

You don't understand how things work in a vacuum. You don't understand the inverse square law. You don't understand that the sun is a sphere spraying light and energy in ALL directions.........which is why only a fraction hits Earth. And you obviously don't understand that if the distance were greater......a lesser fraction would then hit Earth.

You're ignorant. That is the only issue here.
Let me tell you what you don't understand. You do not understand that a vacuum means zilch, nothing, none existent, nothing could operate in it.
You people go on and say, "oh but space isn't a true vacuum it does contain bits of matter.2
How in the hell can it contain bits of matter. It either contains matter or it doesn't and that matter has to be hand in hand all through your universe for it to be anything. You cannot have it just flitting about here and there with empty space in between.
Your universe is a blackness ...but..we are dealing with your sun and I have to go by your miracles of that sun working in spite of it being impossible, so I have to go on the can't stop the juggernaut of light once in motion.
That being the case, you would not see the sun as you see it now if it was the size you people claim it to be.

?

#### Antonio

• 379
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #51 on: October 15, 2013, 09:38:22 AM »
Go to your the shower, and take a glass.
Put the glass just under the nozzle and note the time to fill it.
Now, empty the glass and put it on the groud, staying  beneath the nozzle. Note the time again.
You should need more time to fill it.
How do you explain it ?
Nozzle direction of perforations and water pressure in an atmosphere as well.
As I said earlier, I understand the direction with your sun being a ball of nuclear fusion allegedly and obviously in that fantasy world it would span out as it's a ball shooting out light, but as in the shower scenario, it's still going to bathe the earth  to hell and we should not see the sun as a small disc of light if it hits our eyes inside this vacuum that cannot weaken it, so we should basically see an earth blanket of sun, not a small disc.
In the shower scenario, the glass receives less water if either the nozzle is narrower or further from it. That's the same with the sun, vacuum or not. You don't want to grasp it?  fine. I'm not surprised.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #52 on: October 15, 2013, 09:46:58 AM »
Go to your the shower, and take a glass.
Put the glass just under the nozzle and note the time to fill it.
Now, empty the glass and put it on the groud, staying  beneath the nozzle. Note the time again.
You should need more time to fill it.
How do you explain it ?
Nozzle direction of perforations and water pressure in an atmosphere as well.
As I said earlier, I understand the direction with your sun being a ball of nuclear fusion allegedly and obviously in that fantasy world it would span out as it's a ball shooting out light, but as in the shower scenario, it's still going to bathe the earth  to hell and we should not see the sun as a small disc of light if it hits our eyes inside this vacuum that cannot weaken it, so we should basically see an earth blanket of sun, not a small disc.
In the shower scenario, the glass receives less water if either the nozzle is narrower or further from it. That's the same with the sun, vacuum or not. You don't want to grasp it?  fine. I'm not surprised.
I've already told you I grasped it. I knew what you were talking about.
The problem is, you are refusing to grasp what I'm saying because you can't or won't comprehend it.

?

#### Umurweird

• 796
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #53 on: October 15, 2013, 10:15:51 AM »
Quote
You do not understand that a vacuum means zilch, nothing, none existent, nothing could operate in it.

No, all a vacuum means is an isolated enviroment. Space with nothing in it. No interference.

Anything can operate in a vacuum..........but it operates without interference from anything outside the vacuum.

Again, you're only issue is ignorance.

Quote
You people go on and say, "oh but space isn't a true vacuum it does contain bits of matter.2

True statement.
Quote
How in the hell can it contain bits of matter. It either contains matter or it doesn't and that matter has to be hand in hand all through your universe for it to be anything. You cannot have it just flitting about here and there with empty space in between.

Space is vast. With bits of matter.

Ignorance.

Quote
Your universe is a blackness ...but..we are dealing with your sun and I have to go by your miracles of that sun working in spite of it being impossible, so I have to go on the can't stop the juggernaut of light once in motion.

So you think the intensity of a sun ray should be the same regardless of how far you are from it?

Quote
That being the case, you would not see the sun as you see it now if it was the size you people claim it to be.

By you people do you mean ones that aren't completely ignorant and likely insane?
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

?

#### rottingroom

• 4785
• Around the world.
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #54 on: October 15, 2013, 10:19:19 AM »
Scepti you keep saying a vacuum is nothing but you are dead wrong. There is no example in the world anywhere of what you conceive as nothing.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2013, 10:33:51 AM »

No, all a vacuum means is an isolated enviroment. Space with nothing in it. No interference.
What do you mean, "all a vacuum means?" A vacuum is exactly what it says, devoid of ALL MATTER, meaning it cannot exist as anything at all. How in the hell can anything move in a none existence?

Anything can operate in a vacuum..........but it operates without interference from anything outside the vacuum.

Ok, you explain to me how something can operate in something that cannot exist.

Space is vast. With bits of matter.

Just bits of matter, eh? Just little bits of matter floating about like orange pips in a bath full of water, eh?

By you people do you mean ones that aren't completely ignorant and likely insane?
No, I mean Roundies.

?

#### Umurweird

• 796
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #56 on: October 15, 2013, 10:38:08 AM »
Quote
What do you mean, "all a vacuum means?" A vacuum is exactly what it says, devoid of ALL MATTER, meaning it cannot exist as anything at all. How in the hell can anything move in a none existence?

Are you actually this ignorant or do you just pretend to be?

When someone says vacuum, in science, it means space in isolation, without interference.

Quote
Ok, you explain to me how something can operate in something that cannot exist.

I can't because that isn't what vacuum means.

Quote
Just bits of matter, eh? Just little bits of matter floating about like orange pips in a bath full of water, eh?

No, not orange pips in a bath full of water. Bits of matter in vast space. You seem to reject every analogy on this thread that people have used to try to explain the answers to your questions..........so please refrain from using ridiculous analogies yourself.

You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

#### 29silhouette

• 3302
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #57 on: October 15, 2013, 10:49:21 AM »
so we should basically see an earth blanket of sun, not a small disc.
The entire sky should be filled with the sun no matter which way we look?  Is that what you're saying?

Objects appear smaller the further away they are, regardless if they're viewed through atmosphere, 1/10 atmosphere, 1/1000 atmosphere, or vacuum.

#### sceptimatic

• Flat Earth Scientist
• 27003
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #58 on: October 15, 2013, 10:57:25 AM »

Are you actually this ignorant or do you just pretend to be?

When someone says vacuum, in science, it means space in isolation, without interference.
What the hell do you mean, "space in isolation?"

Quote
Ok, you explain to me how something can operate in something that cannot exist.
I can't because that isn't what vacuum means.
Of course that's not what it means, to your science. If it did, then we would not be arguing the point.
Your science uses EVACUATED matter in PARTIAL terms to describe a vacuum, which allegedly leaves scattered matter that is independent of each other and you cannot see how ridiculous this is.

No, not orange pips in a bath full of water. Bits of matter in vast space. You seem to reject every analogy on this thread that people have used to try to explain the answers to your questions..........so please refrain from using ridiculous analogies yourself.
As above.

?

#### Umurweird

• 796
##### Re: Can anyone answer this question.
« Reply #59 on: October 15, 2013, 11:01:44 AM »
Quote
What the hell do you mean, "space in isolation?"

Exactly what it means.

Try dictionary.com if you're having trouble understanding what isolation means.

Quote
Of course that's not what it means, to your science. If it did, then we would not be arguing the point.
Your science uses EVACUATED matter in PARTIAL terms to describe a vacuum, which allegedly leaves scattered matter that is independent of each other and you cannot see how ridiculous this is.

Everything in science is ridiculous to you because you have no idea what any of it actually means.

You might as well be trying to read sanskrit and trying to make sense of it.

I don't understand how you can ridicule something you fail to comprehend. It's pure ignorance.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa