Dual-Earth Theory V4 | LATEST IMPROVED VERSION

VERSION 2
I did a lot of research, and managed to improve Jrowe's Dual-Earth theory.

http://i.imgur.com/mUyeSkd.png

Basically the dual-hemiplane Earth has Aether around it, like in the image above, that refracts sunlight towards the surface. At the equator, as commonly accepted among the Dual-Earth Scientific Association (of which I am the president), there is a high concentration of Aether that makes the transition from a hemiplane to another as smooth as possible, therefore almost unobservable. The Earth rotates around its axis (As in the drawing above, the poles are its axis, therefore producing day and night), and at the same time rotates around the Sun.

How to understand this improved theory:

1. Read Jrowe's research.

2. Come here and read the improvements.

3. Praise the Dual-Earth Scientific Association (DESA) and its president (myself) for bringing you the truth.


Edit: DESA NOW HAS A SUBREDDIT ON REDDIT:
http://www.reddit.com/r/DESA/


VERSION 3

1. Aether around Earth now has a different shape.
2. The Earth's axis is tilted, therefore it explains the 6 month day night cycle at the poles.
3. The Earth has an iron core, that spins and produces the magnetic field (as evidence suggests). Above and below the iron disk core, there is magma, heated by the weird processes that take place at the equators.

Here is a graphical representation:
http://i.imgur.com/pdccjGl.png


VERSION 4

A major contribution has been brought by Mikey T Lovzballs in his post, presented below:

I believe you need to add the bulge back in for the Northern and Southern pole areas, that JRowe had in DET version alpha 0.1.  This way the aether does not have such an extreme effect on light. 
We could increase the bulge to a point to where the aether isn't needed to "bend" the light to match observations and you will not need to have the aetheric transmission at the equator.  But that's just silly, it would need to be a spheroid shape to match observations and we would need to accept either aether pushing us down or gravity.
Also, question:  What role does aether play in the magnetic field as shown in your model?
You also have my vote as the new and total authority on all things dual Earth.

Please take the drawings above as mere sketches of reality.

I can see important significant advances on Jroweskeptic's fatally flawed model.   Nice work,  Dual-Earth could finally go somewhere.

Good idea to host it on reddit  http://www.reddit.com/r/DESA/   

I can see important significant advances on Jroweskeptic's fatally flawed model.   Nice work,  Dual-Earth could finally go somewhere.

Good idea to host it on reddit  http://www.reddit.com/r/DESA/   

Thank you!

Welcome to the truth!

abaaaabbbb63,

As the authority on Dual-Earth ( sorry Jrowe) , and one who is capable of responding to questions:

If the sun is between the earths but appears in the sky due to aetheric transmission, Why does it move at all? The distance between the sun and a set point in the sky does not change, so why does the transmission of light go to different places?

Apologies, if aetheric transmission is not part of your improved theory.

Thank you President of DESA, Dual -Earth theory makes a lot more sense like this.
Question, What happens if someone jumps over those purple "concentrated aether spots" do you go into space?
It would make sense as it is well know that going into space is easier from the equators especially if flying east.

The transition is possible because of LOW, not high concentration of aether. Think!

don't pay attention to this moron. his aether is not at all defined (i ask two questions: how and why for your supposed traits) and his theory is a joke. some of us actaully put work into our theories, and it's pathetic how childishness is your only rebuttal.

wolf, the sun is rotating (due to aetheric whirlpools: read the 'dual earth theory' repository thread, and lit only on one side: the currents carry its light in a set direction, but as it rotates, eventually there is no light to carry.

don't pay attention to this moron. his aether is not at all defined (i ask two questions: how and why for your supposed traits) and his theory is a joke. some of us actaully put work into our theories, and it's pathetic how childishness is your only rebuttal.

wolf, the sun is rotating (due to aetheric whirlpools: read the 'dual earth theory' repository thread, and lit only on one side: the currents carry its light in a set direction, but as it rotates, eventually there is no light to carry.

Sorry, but abaaaabbbb63's theory makes much more sense. Your Dual Earth Theory is outdated.

This makes a lot more sense having the sun outside of the system opposed to the sun rays curving under the planet. This definitely closer matches observations.

This makes a lot more sense having the sun outside of the system opposed to the sun rays curving under the planet. This definitely closer matches observations.

don't criticize a model you clearly have no understanding of.
try to also understand occam's razor.

my model work, ab is a moron who thinks he's amusing and really isn't.

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on June 01, 2015, 10:13:08 PM

This makes a lot more sense having the sun outside of the system opposed to the sun rays curving under the planet. This definitely closer matches observations.

don't criticize a model you clearly have no understanding of.
try to also understand occam's razor.

my model work, ab is a moron who thinks he's amusing and really isn't.

No your model doesn't work,  and your fatal weakness is your egotistical refusal to see the obvious flaws.  Not to mention your inability to admit mistakes when they are obvious to all.   Time for a fresh approach.   The external sun is a good start.

I believe you need to add the bulge back in for the Northern and Southern pole areas, that JRowe had in DET version alpha 0.1.  This way the aether does not have such an extreme effect on light. 
We could increase the bulge to a point to where the aether isn't needed to "bend" the light to match observations and you will not need to have the aetheric transmission at the equator.  But that's just silly, it would need to be a spheroid shape to match observations and we would need to accept either aether pushing us down or gravity.
Also, question:  What role does aether play in the magnetic field as shown in your model?
You also have my vote as the new and total authority on all things dual Earth. 

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on June 02, 2015, 05:48:18 AM

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on June 01, 2015, 10:13:08 PM

This makes a lot more sense having the sun outside of the system opposed to the sun rays curving under the planet. This definitely closer matches observations.

don't criticize a model you clearly have no understanding of.
try to also understand occam's razor.

my model work, ab is a moron who thinks he's amusing and really isn't.

No your model doesn't work,  and your fatal weakness is your egotistical refusal to see the obvious flaws.  Not to mention your inability to admit mistakes when they are obvious to all.   Time for a fresh approach.   The external sun is a good start.

i refine my model when genuine flaws are pointed out. no such flaws have been suggested by anyone who actually understands the model. an external sun is not required, an external image is: and a pre-existing mechanism provided that.

i refine my model when genuine flaws are pointed out. no such flaws have been suggested by anyone who actually understands the model.

Not even you understand your model, so you are technically correct in saying that.
Please dont derail this thread, it is about a actual workable Dual Earth by the DESA president.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on June 03, 2015, 05:12:21 AM

i refine my model when genuine flaws are pointed out. no such flaws have been suggested by anyone who actually understands the model.

Not even you understand your model, so you are technically correct in saying that.
Please dont derail this thread, it is about a actual workable Dual Earth by the DESA president.

this thread was created b a moron to mock something he has no understanding of. still waiting for any explanation of aether.
i understand my model fully and have answered quetsions multiple times: you do not get to ignore me just because you'd rather cling to your fantasy. if you are not even going to try to educate yourself on my model why do you assume you're qualified to comment?

JRowe, why don't you just shut the fuck up and let the actual dual-earth experts do their job.

You're a quack, whereas abaaaabbbb63 is the leading academic in this field.

JRowe, why don't you just shut the fuck up and let the actual dual-earth experts do their job.

You're a quack, whereas abaaaabbbb63 is the leading academic in this field.

come back when his model requires fewer assumptions, explains the ability to see across the equator, and has any kind of logical definition for aether.

some of us put work into our theories and don't appreciate seeing them being mocked by ignoramuses.

You're a very bitter man.

You're a very bitter man.

as would you be if you put a lot of work into currently the only accurate model of the world, minimizing assumptions, only to watch it be trampled over by morons without even the slightest understanding of what they're trying to mock.
you're pathetic. accept it and move in.

some of us put work into our theories and don't appreciate seeing them being mocked by ignoramuses.

You are mocked, because you think clouds and air don't exist, even though your argument for one contradicts your argument for the other.

You don't understand basic chemistry and physics and then insult people for asking questions when you can neither explain or communicate you irrationality effectively.

You hide behind a "fewer" assumptions reason, which is a) not a proof of anything and B) not applicable since your model predicts nothing and is not falsifiable c) ignores mountains of  evidence against it.

For your theory to be true, we have to assume all the evidence against it is false, and that is A LOT of assumptions.

If you are mocked,  you should be.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on June 03, 2015, 08:12:25 AM

some of us put work into our theories and don't appreciate seeing them being mocked by ignoramuses.

You are mocked, because you think clouds and air don't exist, even though your argument for one contradicts your argument for the other.

You don't understand basic chemistry and physics and then insult people for asking questions when you can neither explain or communicate you irrationality effectively.

You hide behind a "fewer" assumptions reason, which is a) not a proof of anything and B) not applicable since your model predicts nothing and is not falsifiable c) ignores mountains of  evidence against it.

For your theory to be true, we have to assume all the evidence against it is false, and that is A LOT of assumptions.

If you are mocked,  you should be.

if you do not understand the model, do not argue against it. if you do not understand occam's razor, do not pretend to be logical. i don't even know where to start, your post is utterly wrong.
you can't separate personal beliefs from dual earth theory, you don't understand a reductio ad absurdum, you refuse to question your own closed-minded fantasy, you don't understand frustration at straw men and ignorance, you still don't understand occam's razor, you have read absolutely nothing about the model, you don't understand that observations may have multiple explanations, you don't understand what an assumption is...

that's roughly in order. sort it out yourself, there's only so much time i can dedicate to that degree of ignorance.

at least educate yourself about what it is you're rejecting for no reason.

if you do not understand occam's razor, do not pretend to be logical.

Pot meet Kettle.

you don't understand a reductio ad absurdum

Please educate me on your intent. The only way reductio ad absurdum is applicable is if you are showing how untenable dual earth and flat earth is and therefore proving it false.

If that is your intention, and you are really a RE, you unfortunately create strawmen with your theories and do not achieve your goal.

you still don't understand occam's razor, you have read absolutely nothing about the model, you don't understand that observations may have multiple explanations, you don't understand what an assumption is...

I'm Rubber your glue....childish, but clearly you are not intelligent or self aware to appreciate the irony of your statements.

at least educate yourself about what it is you're rejecting for no reason.

I read your theory JRowe. It's simply crap. You have no credibility.  When you are the only person who believes, nothing is "well-known". When you make it up, nothing is “ well defined”.

How do you know where the sun is? (answer is an assumption)
What is it made of? (answer is an assumption)
Why does it get hot?(answer is an assumption)
Why does one half of it not get hot?(answer is an assumption)
How does light get to sky we observe? (answer is an assumption)
Why does the sun in sky move (answer is an assumption)
Why does the sun set (answer is an assumption)
Why do we see stars?(answer is an assumption)
Clouds,stars, moon, satellites. Apollo ....it's all additional assumptions you have to make since the evidence they are real is so well established.

Yes. pictures can be faked, Yes. videos can be faked, Yes. people can be paid off. Yes , governments have been known to lie in the past.
But for Apollo, space shuttle, Hubble, ISIS, GPS , satellite radio, tv, communications and hundreds or more things to be "faked" requires a lot of things to be true.  Each one of those is an assumption that you must account for in your theory, because if any of it is real. Your theory is kaput.

Saying space exploration is faked because dual earth  theory is true is not a valid critique on space exploration.

Given the overwhelming evidence, since space exploration is real dual earth theory is not valid.

you're pathetic. accept it and move in.

I'm not moving in Jrowe.  You know we'll keep falling out like last time.  The mess you leave in bathroom is just disgusting.

Lets just stay friends.

Mike you forgot about aether, every property assigned to it in JRowe's model is an assumption in itself, and there are quite a lot of them. 
Also with satellites, no one here has given any refutation that does not include mass conspiracy and experimental technology(stratellites, experimental since  that doesn't work with the triangulation of the signal and has never been tested successfully for long duration flights.  One in 1969 for two hours with a 5 pound payload that could not hold its position, one in December of 2004 that was moderately successful, still had major issues holding a steady position.  With satellite communication the stable position of the satellite is crucial.  It simply will not work in any model without orbital mechanics.

consequences. and. observations. and. logic. are. not. assumptions.

try to not be so obviously wrong.

you don't seem to understand that it is possible to not believe air exists, and still use it when talking about the round earth model to show a contradiction.

mikey, there are TWO assumptions, both logical consequences before. you have already been corrected on this. do you take pride in actively being ignorant? consequences are not assumptions.

Whoah there honcho, you haven't corrected me at all.  You have restated your belief that youy are not making assumptions.  Yet another assumption. 
Until you provide something, anything in the way of scratching the surface of evidence, everything you are saying is an assumption. 
Your logic is absolutely flawed, hence so are your conclusions from it.
You dodge every question to get clarification about your assumptions, yet you claim everyone cannot read.  I still await something from you that is even mildly thoughtful.
Lets just pick one thing, aether.  List the properties that you are assuming it has, then give me evidence to support the assumptions that will get them on the path to being something other than assumptions. 
Queue your hand waving insult ridden response now.

Whoah there honcho, you haven't corrected me at all.  You have restated your belief that youy are not making assumptions.  Yet another assumption. 
Until you provide something, anything in the way of scratching the surface of evidence, everything you are saying is an assumption. 
Your logic is absolutely flawed, hence so are your conclusions from it.
You dodge every question to get clarification about your assumptions, yet you claim everyone cannot read.  I still await something from you that is even mildly thoughtful.
Lets just pick one thing, aether.  List the properties that you are assuming it has, then give me evidence to support the assumptions that will get them on the path to being something other than assumptions. 
Queue your hand waving insult ridden response now.

why? you never read a fucking post i write, i have already answered this question for you, i have a model trhead witha  whoel section dediacted to this question, what is teh point in wasting time on you when you've amde it clear you only ever ignore EVERY WORD I SAY?
I HAVE ANSWERED THIS QUESTION DIRETLY TO YOU ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS
I AM SICK OF HAVING TO DO SAY
SOP MAKING ME REPEAT MYSELF AND ACTUALLY READ FOR ONCE

CONSEQUENCES. ARE. NOT. ASSUMPTIONS

dual earth  theory, ifnormationr epository, if you're not going to take the slightest fucking amount of time to even learn about the theory, if you're going to ignore the fact i have answered yoru questions mutliple times, if you are going to just make me repeat myself over eveyr fucking thread we engage in, why the hell should i botherwith you? it's clear it's a waste of time.

LEARN TO FUCKING READ I AM SICK OF REPEATING MYSELF WITH MORONS LIKE YOU

Nope, incorrect again there JRowe.  I have read what you write, I ask for clarification, and some follow up questions and you fly off the handle, every time.  Very predictable really. 
How about you actually answer a question rather than dodge it.  Repeating the same thing again when asked for clarification is not answering anything.  Acting like a spoiled brat and insulting people gets you made fun of and ridiculed.  Yet you haven't matured to the point that you understand this yet, I see. 
Answer one question about your model and then the follow up questions until both parties are satisfied with the result, either they agree or not, just to the point to where there are no more realistic follow up questions. 

Not this:
You:Aether is space, see I defined it perfectly.
Someone else:  Wait what do you mean Aether is space, you have assigned properties to aether that are not in line with what space is? 
You: STOP ASKING ME about it, I EXPLAINED IT ALREADY, aether is space.   
Someone else: Don't get mad, just explain why you think this, it doesn't make sense.  How can aether be space and still be stuff?
You: YOU PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND CANNOT READ.  GO F#$% YOURSELVES, I'M DONE!!!!!

This is how you answer every question.

I have a keychain that I have had since i was a child, I have never had cancer.

based on this i have formed a hypothesis that the keychain prevents cancer.

I use this hypothesis to make predictions about tomorrow, and so far...it has a 100% success rate.

my theory uses only one assumption, is that the keychain prevents cancer.

JRowe, is this a valid theory based on my observations?

I'm gonna channel my inner stupi...   uhh, JRowe.   

Yes, but the keychain is highly charged with negative aetheric charge and therefore repels the aetheric cancer molecules. 

wait, no he would say
STOP MOCKING ME!!!,  You are ignoring what I said and now you are just being ignorant, are you just a troll or are you stupid?
That is not what I have done, the aether told me what it was and I have based my assumpt.... no, observations and logical  asserta....no, conclusions on it.  Aether is well defined, it is space.  The keychain strawman is just trying to derail.