doing away with the conspiracy

  • 99 Replies
  • 21374 Views
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
doing away with the conspiracy
« on: April 12, 2015, 02:11:42 PM »
a lot of people complain about the conspiracy. it seems to be a logical deduction, and personally i firmly hold that space travel must be unfeasible due to the effect of aetheric whirlpools. however, if we imagine space travel is possible, and it is indeed possible to walk on the moon without burning, could the earth still be flat?

there is, after all, no reason to assume high altitude photos are completely accurate. with the scale involved, it is possible that light was simply contorted, and it was only possible to see a set amount of the earth. after all, the moon can only be seen from certain points on the earth's surface: that directly implies only certain points on the earth's surface can be seen from the moon.
around the earth, we see only darkness because light only goes a certain distance. this is a logical conclusion, as well: if light could go on endlessly it violates all number of scientific laws. we all know things become less visible with distance. it could be possible that what causes so-called curvature, and a round photo of the earth, is simply due to light only being visible over a set distance, forming the radius of a circle.

i am not saying this is so, merely putting the thought out there. flat earth theory would not automatically require a conspiracy.

if any would like to discuss this idea, feel free, i have little else to say.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2015, 03:14:19 PM »
Yes, but have you proved aetheric whirlpools? And your proof is aether exists, therefore there is aetheric whirlpools. Why does aether do what it does? Because it's needed for aetheric whirlpools, which are key to FET.
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2015, 03:26:35 PM »
Don't try to derail this thread with requests for evidence!!!!
Jrowe does not like that.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63382.0#.VSrw6fnF_74

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #3 on: April 14, 2015, 04:08:20 AM »
Yes, but have you proved aetheric whirlpools? And your proof is aether exists, therefore there is aetheric whirlpools. Why does aether do what it does? Because it's needed for aetheric whirlpools, which are key to FET.

that is not remotely relevant. i am trying to talk about whether flat earth theory would be possible without a conspiracy. are you physically capable of staying on topic?
i have explained aether mutliple times, you have never paid attention. take it to a different thread, and try to at least do the slightest bit of reading on dual earth theory. i suggest starting with my model thread (end of page two and on).
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

?

Weatherwax

  • 761
  • Grand Lover of Satan and Science
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #4 on: April 14, 2015, 04:20:20 AM »
You still need the conspiracy to explain why everyone is being told the earth is round, ice wall guarding, distances/flight times in southern hemisphere, ICBMs not existing, the worlds astronomers and physicists all lying to us, etc etc.
A delusion is something that someone believes in despite a total lack of evidence - Prof. Richard Dawkins.

Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #5 on: April 14, 2015, 04:31:52 AM »
we see only darkness because light only goes a certain distance. this is a logical conclusion, as well: if light could go on endlessly it violates all number of scientific laws. we all know things become less visible with distance. 

What scientific laws exactly?
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #6 on: April 14, 2015, 04:48:32 AM »
Consider this picture



Doesn't exactly agree with your dual earth model. Shouldn't Africa be cut at the equator?

I don't think your ideas can survive without an actual conspiracy. There are just too many photos out there for you to explain how they were somehow distorted.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #7 on: April 14, 2015, 08:16:34 AM »
You still need the conspiracy to explain why everyone is being told the earth is round, ice wall guarding, distances/flight times in southern hemisphere, ICBMs not existing, the worlds astronomers and physicists all lying to us, etc etc.

in dual earth theory, there is no ice wall to need guarding, nothing to alter flight times, whether or not nuclear weaponry exists does not inherently relate to the shape of the earth, and as for the rest, honest mistakes are possible.
i have no doubt there are other flat earth answers to the early points, but that isn't hugely relevant. my suggestion was only that there could be a natural occurence which causes, for example, photos to take on a curved form.

in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade. dual earth theory allows light to cross at the equator, creating the appearance of a continuous surface: if any light outside of a certain distance gives us, that would cause darkness and, from any point, would result in a circular view.

this is all just speculation, but interesting nonetheless.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

FalseProphet

  • 3696
  • Life is just a tale
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2015, 08:39:54 AM »
in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade.

But it has been disproved by deduction based on observation and experiments.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2015, 08:41:14 AM »
in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade.

But it has been disproved by deduction based on observation and experiments.

could you please give an example that doesn't assume a round earth?
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2015, 08:46:34 AM »
Light, unless deflected, or it striking matter, will travel forever in a straight line.  What makes things go hazy is atmoshperic conditions, such as excess water vapor (humidity), pollen, dust, pollution, etc. floating around in the atmosphere. (Not to disagree with your aether but no air hypothesis, just other things floating in it.)

Also to remove the conspiracy, you would have to accept the recorded and live streams of the ISS viewing the Earth as it orbits a sphere.  You can watch it long enough to see the same continents come back into view, all while the Earth looks to be moving in one direction below the ISS.  Also to have something staying up there with no constant propulsion, means that they cannot be above something accelerating upwards (standard FE model), but must be falling around it.  With gravity, the mass of the Earth would "pull" itself into a sphere.
Now, is the ISS caught in a aertheric whirlpool?  Since there is no evidence observed at the ISS, and the stars, sun, and moon are not moving with the ISS, then it cannot be in the same whirlpool system, also from Earth the ISS seen to be moving in one direction.  The whirlpool's wouldn't quite work in this scenario.
Back to its movement around the Earth.  Since it crosses the equator regularly in its orbital path, and the altitude it orbits at, one should be able to see clear signs of a disc shaped Earth. 

That's just some of the things in the ISS that would have to be faked.

So no, you can't take away the conspiracy and not have a spheroid model Earth. 



Side note, imagine yourself as a particle passing beside the Earth, also imagine your self going at 99.9% of the speed of light.  Earth would appear to be only a few meters thick (basically looking like your dual Earth model but the two sides would be dependent on which direction the particle was coming from.  If it was north to south, then it would look very much like it.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2015, 08:51:38 AM »
"Light, unless deflected, or it striking matter, will travel forever in a straight line."
why? energy cannot last forever. light is waves, not matter, newton does not apply.

in addition, flat earth theory does not require acceleration (dual earth theory has none, for example), and if there are multiple aetheric whirlpools, as seems likely, the space station could be caught in one, and not others.

i am not saying i hold this is true, but it is interesting to consider, no?
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2015, 08:55:24 AM »
in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade.

But it has been disproved by deduction based on observation and experiments.

could you please give an example that doesn't assume a round earth?

Light has been proven to be a particle and act like a wave.  I will search for some of the experiments, maybe some of my own from my physics classes a couple of years ago. 
Unless something basically gets in its way, it will continue on forever.  In the near vacuum of space, there sin't enough stuff to deflect all the particles of light at a high enough rate to diminish it completely before whatever is a trillion times a trillion years.  The easy way to figure this would be to get the results from what the concentration of matter is in near Earth orbit (hard to find someone to trust if you believe in a conspiracy) and the measurement of the number of light particles (photons) expelled from the sun in a particular direction, or how many are reflected from the Earth back into orbit.  I am saying near Earth orbit since it would be more than matter compared to further out and we are discussing how far you could see the reflection of Earth while in near Earth orbit.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2015, 08:56:20 AM »
i am not saying i hold this is true, but it is interesting to consider, no?

Which is why I suggested it.

*

FalseProphet

  • 3696
  • Life is just a tale
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2015, 09:07:34 AM »
"Light, unless deflected, or it striking matter, will travel forever in a straight line."
why? energy cannot last forever. light is waves, not matter, newton does not apply.

Light traveling through empty space does not lose energy. Also matter doing that does not lose energy, when it travels with constant velocity. That's not even modern physics, it was proven by Galilei (deduction employing simple math based on observation). It doesn't matter here if it is particles or waves.

If light loses energy it does not fade away, but decreases in frequency. These are so basic things. Yet you do not even know that.



in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade.

But it has been disproved by deduction based on observation and experiments.

could you please give an example that doesn't assume a round earth?

You just need  2 mirrors and a straight path for the light between them.

« Last Edit: April 14, 2015, 09:26:50 AM by FalseProphet »

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #15 on: April 14, 2015, 04:04:13 PM »
"Light, unless deflected, or it striking matter, will travel forever in a straight line."
why? energy cannot last forever. light is waves, not matter, newton does not apply.

Light traveling through empty space does not lose energy. Also matter doing that does not lose energy, when it travels with constant velocity. That's not even modern physics, it was proven by Galilei (deduction employing simple math based on observation). It doesn't matter here if it is particles or waves.

If light loses energy it does not fade away, but decreases in frequency. These are so basic things. Yet you do not even know that.



in earthisround's example, perhaps light only travels a certain distance. this is what i suggested in my initial post. nothing can go on forever, that's basic knowledge: it seems common sense light would eventually fade.

But it has been disproved by deduction based on observation and experiments.

could you please give an example that doesn't assume a round earth?

You just need  2 mirrors and a straight path for the light between them.

how do two mirrors work? if we are to see them, light will constantly be coming in from an outside source. if we lock them away, light will not keep moving between them, as a camera in the box will show. shadows exist, do they not? light stops and does not reflect off matter, it fades to darkness.

i know matter does not lose energy when it travels with a costant speed. light is not matter: light is energy, which fades until it is not visible. there is an aura of heat around the earth in all photos, which could be the infrared, and there are radio waves (blamed on satellites) further around the earth. this is what we observe.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #16 on: April 15, 2015, 06:33:17 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #17 on: April 15, 2015, 09:24:58 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #18 on: April 15, 2015, 09:31:36 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.
Photons can behave like a particle or wave. De Broglie's wavelength formula relates all mass to a wavelength.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2015, 09:34:10 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.
Photons can behave like a particle or wave. De Broglie's wavelength formula relates all mass to a wavelength.

my point precisely.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2015, 09:51:05 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.
Photons can behave like a particle or wave. De Broglie's wavelength formula relates all mass to a wavelength.

my point precisely.
Actually no. I was correcting what you said and answered what you asked. That wasn't your point.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2015, 10:08:35 AM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.

The problem here is you display lack of understanding of physics (and not for the first time). Once in motion an object will remain in motion indefinitely until acted upon by another object or force. In real life, objects tend to slow down due to the effects of friction with other matter.

Light is an electromagnetic wave and is self propagating. This will continue indefinitely until it encounters other EM waves or matter and will then be either absorbed, re-emitted, refracted or scattered. We livein an atmosphere and are used to seeing light being scattered and refracted by gas and dust in the atmosphere.

In a vacuum, light will continue forever and so will a moving object.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2015, 10:37:06 AM »
Its not too fast for us to measure, its too fast for you to tell with just using your eyes. 

What I was trying to show was that light has to have something to absorb it, or deflect it before it stops traveling.  The mirror box you proposed to disprove this is an incorrect line of reasoning since the mirrors do absorb the light.  Light particles travel at light speed, funny how that works, which is very very fast.  this means much more chances of absorption than you think.  Try calculating the math of something bouncing off a meter wide box traveling at light speed, figure out how many bounces it would do in, say 1 second.  Then figure the mirror absorbs 0.5% of the total light emitted (no way it is even remotely possible to be this low currently) per bounce.  The absorption percentage would remain the same for each bounce, so its 1/2 a percent of the total light that was initially emitted.  So lets say it was 3 billion particles to make it easy. 

Its 299,792,458 meters per second.
so its that many (sort of) bounces in one second.
15 million of the particles are absorbed each bounce.  3 billion times 0.005  (0.5% level of efficiency of this mirror is magical)
So in 200 bounces we have no light left (3 billion divided by 15 million equals 200)
hmm 200 is much less than 299792458
bout 1/150000 of a second.


*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #23 on: April 15, 2015, 01:02:36 PM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.
Photons can behave like a particle or wave. De Broglie's wavelength formula relates all mass to a wavelength.

my point precisely.
Actually no. I was correcting what you said and answered what you asked. That wasn't your point.

my point was that light does not behave just like a particle. in what way did you not support that?
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #24 on: April 15, 2015, 01:04:30 PM »
The reason mirrors cannot continually reflect light back and forth is because they are not perfectly reflective surfaces, there are none in reality.  Each bounce absorbs some of the light reflected, due to the speed of light the light bounces so fast and so many times that the delay between removing the light source and the light disappearing is so short that it appears to be instantaneously to us.  Plus if you have a camera inside the box, the camera is absorbing large amounts of the light also.  If you had a 99% efficient mirror (does not exist) and nothing but a light source to emit the light, the delay between turning off the light source and the light disappearing would still be instantaneous in human time frames. 
Technically you are right that light isn't really matter, as a photon doesn't have mass per say.  But because it is a particle it will travel, without resistance (i.e. something to deflect or absorb it), forever is a straight line.

pho·ton
ˈfōtän/Submit
nounPHYSICS
a particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.

so light fades in what would seem instantaneous to us. if it is so fast, there is no way to measure just how long it takes, so we cannot say cleanly.
photons do not behave like particles, that is common knowledge. people also say light is a wave. which is it?
everything tires out as it moves.

The problem here is you display lack of understanding of physics (and not for the first time). Once in motion an object will remain in motion indefinitely until acted upon by another object or force. In real life, objects tend to slow down due to the effects of friction with other matter.

Light is an electromagnetic wave and is self propagating. This will continue indefinitely until it encounters other EM waves or matter and will then be either absorbed, re-emitted, refracted or scattered. We livein an atmosphere and are used to seeing light being scattered and refracted by gas and dust in the atmosphere.

In a vacuum, light will continue forever and so will a moving object.

if you are proposing energy can go on forever, this is your problem, not mine. light is not matter: it has the properties of a wave, you can't apply newton and say a moving object would go on forever.
the second law of thermodynamics is in play. heated objects cool: heat is infrared, which is, guess what, light. light fades.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #25 on: April 15, 2015, 04:21:45 PM »
a lot of people complain about the conspiracy. it seems to be a logical deduction, and personally i firmly hold that space travel must be unfeasible due to the effect of aetheric whirlpools. however, if we imagine space travel is possible, and it is indeed possible to walk on the moon without burning, could the earth still be flat?

there is, after all, no reason to assume high altitude photos are completely accurate. with the scale involved, it is possible that light was simply contorted, and it was only possible to see a set amount of the earth. after all, the moon can only be seen from certain points on the earth's surface: that directly implies only certain points on the earth's surface can be seen from the moon.
around the earth, we see only darkness because light only goes a certain distance. this is a logical conclusion, as well: if light could go on endlessly it violates all number of scientific laws. we all know things become less visible with distance. it could be possible that what causes so-called curvature, and a round photo of the earth, is simply due to light only being visible over a set distance, forming the radius of a circle.

i am not saying this is so, merely putting the thought out there. flat earth theory would not automatically require a conspiracy.

if any would like to discuss this idea, feel free, i have little else to say.

Please clarify how you can believe the Earth is flat without believing in a massive conspiracy.  If there is no conspiracy, then NASA, SpaceX, satellite manufacturers, GPS operators, DirectTV, etc. are telling the truth.  And one of the things that all of those organizations tell us is that the Earth is round.  FE and The Great Conspiracy go hand-in-hand.  Please explain how I am wrong about this.
Sceptimatic is a proven liar - he claims to have authored several books but won't reveal their names.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #26 on: April 16, 2015, 04:42:42 AM »
a lot of people complain about the conspiracy. it seems to be a logical deduction, and personally i firmly hold that space travel must be unfeasible due to the effect of aetheric whirlpools. however, if we imagine space travel is possible, and it is indeed possible to walk on the moon without burning, could the earth still be flat?

there is, after all, no reason to assume high altitude photos are completely accurate. with the scale involved, it is possible that light was simply contorted, and it was only possible to see a set amount of the earth. after all, the moon can only be seen from certain points on the earth's surface: that directly implies only certain points on the earth's surface can be seen from the moon.
around the earth, we see only darkness because light only goes a certain distance. this is a logical conclusion, as well: if light could go on endlessly it violates all number of scientific laws. we all know things become less visible with distance. it could be possible that what causes so-called curvature, and a round photo of the earth, is simply due to light only being visible over a set distance, forming the radius of a circle.

i am not saying this is so, merely putting the thought out there. flat earth theory would not automatically require a conspiracy.

if any would like to discuss this idea, feel free, i have little else to say.

Please clarify how you can believe the Earth is flat without believing in a massive conspiracy.  If there is no conspiracy, then NASA, SpaceX, satellite manufacturers, GPS operators, DirectTV, etc. are telling the truth.  And one of the things that all of those organizations tell us is that the Earth is round.  FE and The Great Conspiracy go hand-in-hand.  Please explain how I am wrong about this.

that was explained in the post you're replying to. what is your problem?
people can be honestly mistaken.

i am not saying this is the case, it is just an interesting idea.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3545
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #27 on: April 16, 2015, 05:33:46 AM »
Please stop implying that I am using Newton's inertia arguments for light.  Light is an energy particle that propagates as a wave.  It is not like a sound wave that needs a medium to propagate through therefore losing energy as it travels.  Light is energy, not specifically heat.  Infrared is electromagnetic radiation, like light is.  Radiation is energy particles.  Some carry heat.
The second law of thermodynamics does not apply to electromagnetic radiation in that way. 

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2015, 09:13:40 AM »
Please stop implying that I am using Newton's inertia arguments for light.  Light is an energy particle that propagates as a wave.  It is not like a sound wave that needs a medium to propagate through therefore losing energy as it travels.  Light is energy, not specifically heat.  Infrared is electromagnetic radiation, like light is.  Radiation is energy particles.  Some carry heat.
The second law of thermodynamics does not apply to electromagnetic radiation in that way.

alpha and beta radiation are particles. gamma radiation is a wave, of the same kind as light, and it is not composed of particles.
aside from the absurdity of special pleading when it comes to differentiating the waves of light and sound, light is still energy, so the second law of thermodynamics is relevant. it loses coherency as time goes by, no matter what.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: doing away with the conspiracy
« Reply #29 on: April 16, 2015, 09:57:54 AM »
Please stop implying that I am using Newton's inertia arguments for light.  Light is an energy particle that propagates as a wave.  It is not like a sound wave that needs a medium to propagate through therefore losing energy as it travels.  Light is energy, not specifically heat.  Infrared is electromagnetic radiation, like light is.  Radiation is energy particles.  Some carry heat.
The second law of thermodynamics does not apply to electromagnetic radiation in that way.

alpha and beta radiation are particles. gamma radiation is a wave, of the same kind as light, and it is not composed of particles.
aside from the absurdity of special pleading when it comes to differentiating the waves of light and sound, light is still energy, so the second law of thermodynamics is relevant. it loses coherency as time goes by, no matter what.
What's the formula for the loss of energy for light over time?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.