# How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)

• 70 Replies
• 18904 Views

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« on: November 09, 2006, 12:18:51 PM »
To be able to get the gist of this post, you will have to understand the basic principles of the daul wave-particle theory of EMR (electromagnetic radiation).

Basically, it is understood and accepted by most physicists, Round or flat earthers that if something acts as a wave then it also has a quantum particle equivalent.  This can account from visible light all the way to gravity (although this is currently undiscovered; quantum physicists suggest that there is such thing and a gravity wave and therefore there has to be a particle of "gravity" which they have called the graviton).

The particle equivilent of any wave in the electro magnetic spectrum is called the photon.  This has no mass because it is only theoretical and is only a way of describing the way in which the EMR behaves, however, it is made up of pure energy (although you could work out the quantum weight of the photon by rearranging Einstein's equation of relativity e=mc<sup>2</sup>) and to work out the energy of one single photon we can use the equation e=hf (e being energy, h being Plancks constant - 6.626068 × 10<sup>-34</sup> m<sup>2</sup> kg<sup>-1</sup> - and f being the frequency of the wave equivalent of the photon).  Therefore, the energy contained within each photon depends on the frequency of the wave.  Therefore radiowaves (which have the lowest frequency) have the least amount of energy per photon and Gamma rays (which have the highest frequency) have the most.

So onto the easy part which you guys can understand!

When a photon hits a metal, if it has enough energy, it "kicks" out an electron and therefore positively ionising it.  However for low frequency EMR the photon may not contain enough energy to "kick" out the electron.  For most metals the minimum amount of energy required is that of ultraviolet however the energy required varys from metal to metal and in some cases only the high frequency end of visible light is needed.

What I am proposing is that this is how the sun and moon are kept above the earth. I believe that at some point in time the sun and moon were in fact massice disks of metal that were on top of the earths crust and underneath the earths crust is the molten metal core.  We all know that opposites attract and similars repel. In order for this to workI have to take into account a piece of Round earth science; behind all background radiation is that of the big bang.  This I propose is coming from the UA beneath us. This radiation is all of the wavelengths of the EMS but of course only the correct wavelengths have the right frequencies to take part in the photo-electric effect.  This radiation would ionise the metal in the core and that of the sun and moon above the crust with the same charge therefore repelling each other and forcing the sun and moon upwards and stopping them from falling due to the constant acceleration of the UA.

My theory for their rotation is that the concentration of EMR must fluctuate in a reguluar way, changing the amount of charge forced up on it and therefore weakening/strengthening  the repulsion of the discs therefore allowing them to move in a regular pattern.

Thats effectively it.

If there any queries then I would love to hear them so you can either personal message me or, even better reply to this post so that I can take it into account before I place it upon the general forums to be debated.

"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

?

#### BOGWarrior89

• 3793
• We are as one.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2006, 03:18:46 PM »
You are the Flat Earth Einstein.

#### beast

• 2997
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2006, 03:46:52 PM »
Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"
You are the Flat Earth Einstein.

Aren't you studying physics?  You should spend more time doing that and less time on this forum.

?

#### BOGWarrior89

• 3793
• We are as one.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2006, 03:48:10 PM »
Quote from: "beast"
Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"
You are the Flat Earth Einstein.

Aren't you studying physics?  You should spend more time doing that and less time on this forum.

I can stay logged into the forums and be away from my computer.

EDIT: Does this mean you would like to see me leave?

#### beast

• 2997
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2006, 03:50:42 PM »
No I'm saying that I don't think your knowledge of physics is very good.

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2006, 03:51:21 PM »
:lol:

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

?

#### BOGWarrior89

• 3793
• We are as one.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2006, 04:13:10 PM »
Quote from: "beast"
No I'm saying that I don't think your knowledge of physics is very good.

#### beast

• 2997
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2006, 05:51:01 PM »
Well you said:

Quote
You are the Flat Earth Einstein.

And yet the physics mentioned in the above article was physics I learnt in high school.

On principle I'm not going to argue against the theory but I'm sure Phase or Bible dude will be happy to.

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2006, 08:19:30 PM »
But beast, you forget that he's a scientist!  Well, a physicist...well, a physicist in training...well, a first semester college kid...

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

?

#### BOGWarrior89

• 3793
• We are as one.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2006, 09:32:24 AM »
Quote from: "beast"
Well you said:

Quote
You are the Flat Earth Einstein.

And yet the physics mentioned in the above article was physics I learnt in high school.

On principle I'm not going to argue against the theory but I'm sure Phase or Bible dude will be happy to.

I was merely making a reference to the photoelectric effect, something for which Einstein was responsible.  If you didn't catch it, it isn't my fault.

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2006, 10:03:34 AM »
Einstein was hardly responsible for the effect, and it was known to exist before him.  Einstein used his idea of quanta to explain it.

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

?

#### BOGWarrior89

• 3793
• We are as one.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2006, 10:11:02 AM »
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Einstein was hardly responsible for the effect, and it was known to exist before him.  Einstein used his idea of quanta to explain it.

Hooray, technicality based on definitions of words.

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2006, 10:26:27 AM »
Words are how we communicate.  Words have a definition.  If you want to communicate, use the proper words.

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

#### James

• Flat Earther
• The Elder Ones
• 5613
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2006, 07:09:43 AM »
The FEIR is not for petty arguing. I think we need to focus on the fact that the OP is a watertight scientific explanation of the Sun's aloftness! Way to go.
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2006, 08:10:27 AM »
why thank you.

Actually it wasn't Einstein who discovered the photoelectric effect he just wrote the relativity equation.
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2006, 08:16:40 AM »
Quote from: "Dogplatter"
The FEIR is not for petty arguing. I think we need to focus on the fact that the OP is a watertight scientific explanation of the Sun's aloftness! Way to go.

If by 'watertight' you mean 'not possible', then yes, I agree.  I really didn't see the point in talking about such a haphazard application of physics.

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #16 on: November 11, 2006, 08:17:35 AM »
if you can disprove it then go ahead.
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2006, 10:14:44 AM »
Quote from: "Rogherio"
if you can disprove it then go ahead.

I'm alive.  You're alive.  There is life on earth.  Life disproves it.

Two points on this:

1. Ionizing radiation (henceforth as IR).  Just say you are right and there are two neutral disks in the earth.  Since both disks must become ionized, that means the lower disk is not opaque to IR.  Therefore, the surface of the earth is constantly bathed in IR, without the helpful atmosphere to stop it.  That is bad for life.  IR tends to end it.

2. Electric field.  A system that can provide this force based solely on electromagnetic repulsion would create a massive (massive is a massive understatement) electric field.  Any charged particle which entered this field would be immediately swept upwards or pulled into the earth (based on the polarity of the particle).  Ions are essential to life.  Na, Ca, K are all required by our cells to regulate processes.  The electrical field would prevent the transfer of these ions within the cell.  Since the electric field would have to be so great, that the ions would be pulled right out of the cells.  Of course, this assumes that cells could have formed in the first place...

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #18 on: November 12, 2006, 08:42:07 AM »
very good points

1) The earth is constantly bathed in IR anyway. It does have an atmosphere but the two metal plates could easily have been ionised  before an atmosphere was formed as it is now, and even tnow there is still a high amount of IR entering our atmosphere.only ions floating in the atmosphere would reduce the charges upon the disks but these (due to my next explanation) would be in such small amounts that the small amount of IR that does enter the atomosphere would keep the metal plates ionised enough to stop them from losing their charge and therefore the sun and moon crashing into the earth at 9.2 m/s<sup>2</sup>

2)  Between two particles/magnets/etc of the same polarity there is always a neutral point. I will not insult your knowledge of physics my explaining what this is, but of course the bigger that charged particle/etc the bigger the neutral point.  Considering these metallic discs are absolutely massive (being 32 miles in diameter each and we don't know how thick) their neutral points must also be huge.  If the neutral points were not in the right place then it would be completely impossible for life to exist as you state but there are also many things described by RE scientists as coming about by complete luck. The neutral points must be in exactly the correct place for them to be upon the surface of the earths crust and a couple of km above and below it, this would enable other magnets to work and for both anions and cations to move freely. Also these charged plates are far enough away from the earth so that their magnetic force has distinctively.  The charges on individual ions so so small (1.60217646 × 10<sup>-19</sup>C per electron lost) that the weak magnetic field would hardly have impact upon them at all anyway.
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2006, 02:18:40 PM »
Quote from: "Rogherio"
very good points

1) The earth is constantly bathed in IR anyway.

Yes, but the atmosphere stops it before it reaches us.  In your proposed model, the UA provided the IR to ionize the plates.  This means it's comming up through the ground.  There is not much atmosphere between us and the ground.

Quote
2) Between two particles/magnets/etc of the same polarity there is always a neutral point.

There is a neutral point only because the resultant force from the two charges is zero, due to the particle being exactly between them.  If you want to say that we are located exactly 3000 miles from both disks, that's fine.  That would give a lower limit to the thickness of the earth.  However, any deviation from the surface would mean the forces are no longer equal.  It would become very strange to fly an airplane as the charge across it varies.  When it takes off, it's neutral, but as charge accumulates, there is now another force the pilot must deal with.  That's assuming he is still alive and his cells can still use the ions within them...

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson

#### skeptical scientist

• 1285
• -2 Flamebait
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2006, 02:33:49 PM »
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
However, any deviation from the surface would mean the forces are no longer equal.  It would become very strange to fly an airplane as the charge across it varies.  When it takes off, it's neutral, but as charge accumulates, there is now another force the pilot must deal with.  That's assuming he is still alive and his cells can still use the ions within them...

I think the point was if we assume the charged objects are very large and very far away, the point of exact balance is only right at the earth's surface, but the area of a very close to exact balance is extremely large, and includes all elevations to which humans travel. Also, the neutral point might not be exactly between the two charged objects if the charges are unequal, so we can't necessarily calculate the height of the sun, and then use that to calculate the depth of the other metal disk(s).

Should this debate be taken somewhere outside of the FEIR?
-David
E pur si muove!

#### James

• Flat Earther
• The Elder Ones
• 5613
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2006, 02:37:35 PM »
Quote from: "TheEngineer"

Yes, but the atmosphere stops it before it reaches us.  In your proposed model, the UA provided the IR to ionize the plates.  This means it's comming up through the ground.  There is not much atmosphere between us and the ground.

I'm not great at Physics, but isn't it possible that the Earth itself is stopping the radiation hitting us directly, but that radiation from the UA is still able to hit the Sun and Moon at an angle since they are comparitively far above the Earth (about 3000 miles)?
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

#### James

• Flat Earther
• The Elder Ones
• 5613
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2006, 02:38:32 PM »
Quote from: "skeptical_scientist"

Should this debate be taken somewhere outside of the FEIR?

Good idea, I'll move it to General but keep a shadow topic.
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

?

#### phaseshifter

• 841
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2006, 03:01:09 PM »
Ok, a few questions.

1. Why did one (and only 1) of those discs sudently catch fire. And how does it manage to have been burning for all of recorded history?

2. If the sun was part of the earth, why is it about one billion years older than the earth? (if you choose to challenge this fact, you'll have to disprove Nucleocosmochronology, and all other methods involved in determining the age of celestial bodies)

3. Please provide the strenght of this mutual repulsion, and how it was calculated.

4. Assuming this push does exist, it would only have been present exactly under where the sun and moon were when they suddently became ionised for some reason. When the sun circles the earth, why didn't it fall when it left the area directly above the ionised soil?

5. Why can we not detect this ionisation?
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

?

#### Kryptid

• 20
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2006, 08:22:19 PM »
Quote
The particle equivilent of any wave in the electro magnetic spectrum is called the photon.

What proof do you have that photons or other particles exist? You hear about them in textbooks and on TV, but have you ever seen them for yourself? Subatomic particles could be part of the conspiracy.
want a Flat-Earther to PM me, and tell me why they believe Samuel Rowbotham in the first place. If a Flat-Earther requires proof in order to believe something, then why do they believe this man, even though he provided no proof himself?

?

#### phaseshifter

• 841
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2006, 10:58:04 PM »
Quote from: "Kryptid"
Quote
The particle equivilent of any wave in the electro magnetic spectrum is called the photon.

What proof do you have that photons or other particles exist? You hear about them in textbooks and on TV, but have you ever seen them for yourself? Subatomic particles could be part of the conspiracy.

Dude, Superman's power comes from the sun. Which means that the cells in his body constantly perform hyperphotosynthesis. So obviously photons exist.
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #26 on: November 13, 2006, 01:25:42 AM »
Photons are not part of RE science but general physics.

It is generally agreed that without photons, life would not exist. By FE scientists such as myself and RE scientists.

Quote
1. Why did one (and only 1) of those discs sudently catch fire. And how does it manage to have been burning for all of recorded history?

2. If the sun was part of the earth, why is it about one billion years older than the earth? (if you choose to challenge this fact, you'll have to disprove Nucleocosmochronology, and all other methods involved in determining the age of celestial bodies)

3. Please provide the strenght of this mutual repulsion, and how it was calculated.

4. Assuming this push does exist, it would only have been present exactly under where the sun and moon were when they suddently became ionised for some reason. When the sun circles the earth, why didn't it fall when it left the area directly above the ionised soil?

5. Why can we not detect this ionisation?

1. Has nothing to do with my theory.

2. Was Nucleocosmochronology "discovered" by Round earth or flat earth scientists? How do you know it isnt a complete lie?

3. Unless you intend on flying the the sun and moon and discovering what type of metal they are and doing the same with the earths core I cannot provide you with that answer.

4.  No, the whole of the earths core would have been ionised.

5. You probably can. It probably has something to do with the ionosphere.

Quote
Yes, but the atmosphere stops it before it reaches us. In your proposed model, the UA provided the IR to ionize the plates. This means it's comming up through the ground. There is not much atmosphere between us and the ground.

My theory that IR was coming from the UA maybe flawed, but what is there to say that it isnt coming from somewhere other than the UA?

Quote
There is a neutral point only because the resultant force from the two charges is zero, due to the particle being exactly between them. If you want to say that we are located exactly 3000 miles from both disks, that's fine. That would give a lower limit to the thickness of the earth. However, any deviation from the surface would mean the forces are no longer equal. It would become very strange to fly an airplane as the charge across it varies. When it takes off, it's neutral, but as charge accumulates, there is now another force the pilot must deal with. That's assuming he is still alive and his cells can still use the ions within them...

Maybe this is what AMS and the bends are?

Whats to say that aeroplanes cannot be non-magnetic and therefore protecting the passengers inside?
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

?

#### Thrudgie

• 67
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2006, 05:20:52 AM »
MARS EXISTS!

#### Rogherio

• 148
• Me gusta las gambas.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2006, 08:30:07 AM »
thanks for that.

yes mars does exist.

we never said it didnt...
"My breasts are small and humble so you don't confuse them with mountains"

#### TheEngineer

• Planar Moderator
• 15483
• GPS does not require satellites.
##### How the sun and moon are held up (photoelectric effect)
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2006, 11:30:31 AM »
Quote from: "Rogherio"

Whats to say that aeroplanes cannot be non-magnetic and therefore protecting the passengers inside?

As an aircraft flies, it becomes negatively charged as it strips electrons from the air it's plowing through.  As the aircraft became more negatively charged and rose higher, it would feel a repulsion from the disk above.  This would seem to the pilot that either gravity has increased or the weight of the aircraft has.

"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
-- Bob Hudson