What is wrong in this Picture ?

  • 66 Replies
  • 11005 Views
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2015, 04:32:08 AM »
One of the things you just said was it happens at different altitudes. Now you're telling me that you're not talking about altitude or elevation.  :-\   Why do globularists have such problems keeping their thoughts straight?
"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.."

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2015, 11:46:26 AM »
One of the things you just said was it happens at different altitudes. Now you're telling me that you're not talking about altitude or elevation.  :-\   Why do globularists have such problems keeping their thoughts straight?

It's hard to keep your thoughts straight when you're hanging out with a bunch of tinfoil-hatters.

Basically, we can detect differences in the gravitational field with a gravimeter. Two ways we can detect this are:
- Change altitude
- Stay at same altitude (sea level for example), but go somewhere else on Earth.

You "explained" the first scenario, but you can't explain the second, or why measuring the G-field around the Earth matches what we would expect on an oblate spheroid.
The only explanation would be: "there is bulge (that peaks at the equator) around the flat Earth"

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #32 on: June 18, 2015, 08:07:06 PM »

-Change altitude: increasing proximity to celestial bodies
-"Go somewhere else on earth": moving in relation to celestial bodies

Why is that inexplicable to you?

"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.."

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #33 on: June 18, 2015, 08:16:29 PM »

-Change altitude: increasing proximity to celestial bodies
-"Go somewhere else on earth": moving in relation to celestial bodies

Why is that inexplicable to you?
This
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gravity_of_Earth#Comparative_gravities_in_various_cities_around_the_world

I don't see correlation. The rest of the article says you are wrong as well.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 08:18:49 PM by sokarul »
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #34 on: June 18, 2015, 08:21:15 PM »
Plus there is this thread where I show you can't have variances on a flat earth.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63935.0#.VYOKm0brDEo
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #35 on: June 18, 2015, 08:27:04 PM »
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.

Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)
"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.."

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #36 on: June 18, 2015, 10:34:08 PM »
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.

Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)

No need for commentary. It supplements my statement above.
The gravitational variances around the world match exactly what we would expect on an oblate spheroid Earth. To explain this we have two possibilities:
-The Earth is an oblate spheroid.
-"moving in relation to celestial bodies", whatever that means.

... Occam's Razor yadda yadda...

Oh and in that thread nowhere did I see "a lack of elementary physics understanding", nice try though.

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2015, 05:57:05 AM »
A link without commentary to a wiki page. Surely, I defer to your grand understanding, sok.
kinda thought it explained itself. Gravitational measurements that show no correlation to altitude.
Quote
Another link to a thread wherein you show a lack of elementary physics understanding.  You're on a roll...   ::)
Yet you couldn't. Feel free to back up your claim. Or just be a typical fe'er and not be able to back anything up. Whatever.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 09:19:33 AM by sokarul »
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2015, 02:39:22 PM »
No need for commentary. It supplements my statement above.
The gravitational variances around the world match exactly what we would expect on an oblate spheroid Earth. To explain this we have two possibilities:
-The Earth is an oblate spheroid.
-"moving in relation to celestial bodies", whatever that means.

It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?


Quote
Oh and in that thread nowhere did I see "a lack of elementary physics understanding", nice try though.

If you feel comfortable admitting such, that's fine by me.
"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.."

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2015, 02:42:12 PM »
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.

If you feel comfortable admitting such, that's fine by me.

K

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2015, 03:17:05 PM »
Ski seems to have ignored my post. Maybe he can't explain why Denver with an altitude of 5280 feet has gravity that is more or similar to cities that are at sea level.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

Mikey T.

  • 2414
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #41 on: June 19, 2015, 03:33:11 PM »
Did I just see a flat Earther claim that someone else has a lack of basic elementary physics?  Seriously.
So lets see how that works then.
Please elaborate why the centrifugal force of the Earths spin at the equator matches with the decrease in expected gravity in that area for the distance from the center of the sphere?  Do you understand how the forces can counteract?
We will just stay on this for a second while you show your vast understanding of physics.  Please continue.
If it is the increase in celestial objects that "pull" you away from the Earth in those areas, what is this force then?  Gravity of a sufficiently size and density (incase you don't understand density it is the amount of mass concentrated in relation to the space it occupies), would actually form into a ball. 
So are you saying you believe in gravity but only part?  If so how do you explain how these celestial objects that exert enough gravity to counteract Earths gravity in a significant enough way to change measurements, are spherical in nature?  Or is it more of the aether magical stuff?

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #42 on: June 19, 2015, 06:38:00 PM »
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
"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.."

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #43 on: June 19, 2015, 09:01:42 PM »
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
So still no rebuttal against the massive amount of evidence against your claims?
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

?

11cookeaw1

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #44 on: June 20, 2015, 10:21:21 AM »
It's exactly what we would expect if we would have celestial gravitation concentrated about the equator (witness the approximate paths of the sun, moon), as well. What makes your pre-expectation more valid?

That would fluctuate throughout the day, as the sun in your "model" is moving. We don't observe fluctuating gravity at a single point in reality.


Uhm, ... we do    :-\
Prove it

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2015, 04:58:31 PM »
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
"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.."

?

11cookeaw1

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #46 on: June 22, 2015, 03:33:10 PM »
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
Can you provide evidence for the existence of daily fluctuations of axles at one part per say... 10000. If you can't, then your model is most certainly wrong.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #47 on: June 24, 2015, 07:34:22 PM »
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???
Can you provide evidence for the existence of daily fluctuations of axles at one part per say... 10000. If you can't, then your model is most certainly wrong.

Huh?  ???  He just did; gravitation, as observed by tides.  Did you just pop in here without reading the thread?  Get on your game or NASA will fire you for sure. 

*

sokarul

  • 16705
  • Discount Chemist
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #48 on: June 24, 2015, 10:14:26 PM »
How does an object have a different acceleration than the earth's acceleration and not float away?
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

*

JerkFace

  • 10356
  • Looking for Occam
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #49 on: June 24, 2015, 11:07:08 PM »
How do you propose to explain tides, for example, without fluctuating gravitational values based on the movement of celestial bodies?  ???

What gravitational model are you proposing?   Doesn't sound like denspressure,  doesn't sound like UA,  so what is your flat earth gravity model?

Tides forces are the natural result of diverging gravitational field lines.   Stretching longitudinally and compressing across the field direction.
Tidal forces in a uniform gravitational field are zero,  therefore tides are not possible under UA.

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #50 on: June 25, 2015, 03:50:41 AM »
How does an object have a different acceleration than the earth's acceleration and not float away?

I find it difficult to believe that you are being deliberately obtuse.
"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.."

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #51 on: June 25, 2015, 05:08:30 AM »
If the earth is hurtling along at an arse hair off the speed of light, and constantly accelerating, then any variations in g, whether they are caused by "celestial bodies" or mass migrations of tooth fairies, would cause the planet to tear apart in nano seconds.

UA is simply incompatible with measured variations in g across the earth's surface, and therefore falsified.  You need to up with something that matches observations.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #52 on: June 25, 2015, 05:36:18 AM »
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.

Further I believe I've addressed variations in measured values of 'g' to any competent person's understanding.

"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.."

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #53 on: June 25, 2015, 09:19:33 AM »
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Quote
Further I believe I've addressed variations in measured values of 'g' to any competent person's understanding.
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #54 on: June 25, 2015, 07:30:30 PM »
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Why isn't the earth being torn apart in RET?  And why are you using the term "relativistic velocity" in this context?


Quote
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....   
"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.."

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #55 on: June 25, 2015, 08:51:58 PM »
Get back to me when you understand why "an arse hair off the speed of light" is completely irrelevant in the context of your false blanket statement regarding the earth tearing itself apart.
You are correct in one sense - the earth would tear itself apart whatever the speed.  The relativistic velocity just means it would do it much more quickly and spectacularly.

Why isn't the earth being torn apart in RET?  And why are you using the term "relativistic velocity" in this context?

Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, but this varies slightly depending on where (and how far from the center of the Earth) you are. UA has the flat earth itself accelerating "upward" at 9.8 m/s2. If this varies over the surface (it's  does), then part of Earth is accelerating at a higher rate than another, which means the areas with higher acceleration at the surface (the poles vs. the Equator) will be traveling faster and cover more distance in a finite amount of time.

The measured difference in the acceleration of gravity at sea level at the Equator is about 0.5% less than at the poles.

Since distance traveled, s, is s = at2/2, then after one day (86400 seconds):

sequator = 9.7755 m/s2 (86400 sec)2/2
 = 36,486,858,000 m
 = 36,486,858 km

spole = 9.8245 m/s2 (86400 sec)2/2
 = 36,669,750,000 m
 = 36,669,750 km

Meaning the polar regions have traveled "upward" 182,892 km further than the equatorial regions after a single day. Given that even the young-earth crowd puts the age of the Earth at several thousand years, it seems like this would be somewhat of a problem.

Quote
Quote
Any variations in g would mean (under the UA model) that different parts of the planet are accelerating at different rates - with predictable results.

Yep. The regions with just slightly lower acceleration would lag other regions by almost 200,000 km in very short order.

Quote
Right, because of the "relativistic velocity" or something....

No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JerkFace

  • 10356
  • Looking for Occam
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #56 on: June 25, 2015, 09:41:31 PM »
Not that I'm defending UA,  but the only way I could see it working is if the flat earth was orbiting something,  at a radius and velocity that would provide 1g of centripetal acceleration,  the flat side would have to always facing towards the center,  that way you could have 1g without ever reaching relativistic velocities.   Differential gravity would still be a problem.

The bigger problem for UA, in my opinion is tidal forces,  you don't get tidal forces without divergence in the gravitational field,  and a flat earth gravitational field doesn't diverge ergo, no tides.

The other thing not mentioned so far, is that geological gravitational surveys are commonly used in prospecting,  the technique is to map tiny gravitational variances caused by different density ore bodies.   

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #57 on: June 25, 2015, 09:43:54 PM »
Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, ..

I'm going to try to gently help you and say that apparent acceleration of you is toward the earth in both models. I'll let you figure the rest out on your own, seeing as how you are so much smarter than me.


Quote
No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity, first. Second, you're missing a good deal of thought about frames therein lies a good deal of your (plural) problems with the rubbish about relativistic velocities at all affecting the earth.
"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.."

Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #58 on: June 25, 2015, 10:01:35 PM »
Because, unlike UA proposed for the flat earth in place of gravity, the force gravity exerts on your mass accelerates you toward the center of the Earth at about 9.8 m/s2, ..

I'm going to try to gently help you and say that apparent acceleration of you is toward the earth in both models. I'll let you figure the rest out on your own, seeing as how you are so much smarter than me.

No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.

Quote
Quote
No, we haven't even gotten into relativistic effects yet. Since velocity v = at, after one day, the slower-accelerating equatorial regions are traveling

vequator = 9.7755 m/sec2 * 86400 sec
 = 844,603.2 m/sec
 = 844.6 km/sec

This is still well below relativistic velocity (the speed of light is about 300,000 km/sec). After a few weeks, however...

You are not using the correct formula for velocity, first. Second, you're missing a good deal of thought about frames therein lies a good deal of your (plural) problems with the rubbish about relativistic velocities at all affecting the earth.

Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: What is wrong in this Picture ?
« Reply #59 on: June 25, 2015, 10:04:44 PM »
No, actually, UA is based on the premise that the entire Earth is accelerating toward you. Equivalence principle and all that.
Please explain more of this new relativity you've formed with a preferred frame.

Quote
Can you explain what you think the correct formula for velocity is? We can move on to frames of reference after this if you still want.
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds. Can you explain why you believe that is the correct formula?
"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.."