DET - discussions

  • 362 Replies
  • 45715 Views
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: DET - discussions
« Reply #360 on: December 11, 2015, 03:14:19 PM »
Do you understand that measuring the derivative of gravity will be noisy as hell, right? The measure we are looking for is, instead, the delta. Measuring the potential at several diferent points in altitude, filter noise, and average them out to get the m/s^2 per metre. If the discontinuity is, as you seem to say, spatial, then we can aproximate the range via bisection.

Gravity is just one example, though it would be easier: refraction would increase as you look through more air (and so increase with altitude), in addition to the effect of aether.
There will be noise in any scientific experiment. Also handy would be repetitions, to average out noise. With an average of the gravity at each altitude, we can plot and see if it's a smooth curve, or if there are any sudden jumps.
What I meant is that measuring the derivative of gravity is possible, but unfortunate, since derivatives are usually noisier. Measuring g at various points makes more sense, which is what I suggested, and what I think you also accept.

Technically it's still just measuring the derivative, only doing so indirectly. Even so, until the resources are available, I'm not wasting too much time on detailed planning.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: DET - discussions
« Reply #361 on: December 11, 2015, 05:29:31 PM »
Do you understand that measuring the derivative of gravity will be noisy as hell, right? The measure we are looking for is, instead, the delta. Measuring the potential at several diferent points in altitude, filter noise, and average them out to get the m/s^2 per metre. If the discontinuity is, as you seem to say, spatial, then we can aproximate the range via bisection.

Gravity is just one example, though it would be easier: refraction would increase as you look through more air (and so increase with altitude), in addition to the effect of aether.
There will be noise in any scientific experiment. Also handy would be repetitions, to average out noise. With an average of the gravity at each altitude, we can plot and see if it's a smooth curve, or if there are any sudden jumps.
What I meant is that measuring the derivative of gravity is possible, but unfortunate, since derivatives are usually noisier. Measuring g at various points makes more sense, which is what I suggested, and what I think you also accept.

Technically it's still just measuring the derivative, only doing so indirectly. Even so, until the resources are available, I'm not wasting too much time on detailed planning.
There is a diference from measuring the delta,and measuring the derivative. In any case, deltas are more than enough for this. I could try and move some connections to the guys at arquitechture's faculty for them to let me use a gravimeter, but I doubt it. I think I will have to instead use public gravimetric surveys.
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: DET - discussions
« Reply #362 on: December 29, 2015, 12:27:19 AM »
So you refuse to understand anything about DET because you refuse to accept, even as a hypothesis, an accept justified both by logic on its own merits, and by the evidence for the theory as a whole. Just because you ignore the evidence doesn't mean it's not there.
HOW ABOUT YOU LEARN THE MODEL RATHER THAN OUTRIGHT LYING AND CLAIMING THERE IS NO EVIDENCE
  I would accept it as hypothesis if there would be any evidence for it, but there isn't. To accept a hypothesis you must at first show some evidence which shows dual earth and from where I can go further. But you don't have that and you don't have even hypothesis. You have dogma and I can't accept dogma and then start fit evidence to it like you do.  So, if you don't have some evidence for starting point which I can look and determine dual earth without at first accepting DE dogma then you are out of luck.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2015, 02:42:24 AM by zork »
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.