Universal Accelerator - how it works?

There's still no explanation for differences in said acceleration around the world.

Since the acceleration is smaller as you climb a mountain and as you near the Equator, it means the UA is as stupid as the flat earth.

But hey, let's wait for the wrongineer to come up with another trolling text trying to ignore all that.

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on January 08, 2016, 09:34:42 AM

There's still no explanation for differences in said acceleration around the world.

Since the acceleration is smaller as you climb a mountain and as you near the Equator, it means the UA is as stupid as the flat earth.

But hey, let's wait for the wrongineer to come up with another trolling text trying to ignore all that.

As predicted, FE pretenders still can't answer this.

How can the "plane of Earth" accelerate upwards at different rates around the world?

Wait a minute! You are a rocket engineer

Any self-righting mechanism would apply a torque to everything on your earth model.

This would cause vectored accelerations in some very uncomfortable directions for the humans living on your model.

Rocket scientist indeed ... LOL

Quote from: sokarul on January 10, 2016, 06:37:58 PM

Oh, so now it is not OK to make a shitty response!  So not only are you a discount engineer, but also a hypocrite.

I can't believe you didn't see that one coming.  I set you up and you walked right into it.  Idiot.

Holy shit, that was the lamest response you have ever posted.  I want to laugh at you, but damn, now I just feel sorry for you.

Hence the reason I said it was a lame response.  Idiot.

Good Lord.  I'm calling your copy of my post lame.  My post was brilliant.  Your attempt at a come back by copying my post was lame. 

Idiot.

A Universal Accelerator not only would need to add more energy to a closed system (unlike gravity which is not bound by definition to a defined system under its influence), we would feel the force unevenly.

We can see and interact with gravity.

Quote from: TheEngineer on January 11, 2016, 11:20:36 AM

Good Lord.  I'm calling your copy of my post lame.  My post was brilliant.  Your attempt at a come back by copying my post was lame. 

Idiot.

I agree, what I copied was lame.

The very next statement is this very important caveat to the statement prior:

Quote from: TheEngineer on January 09, 2016, 08:05:46 AM

If an object is not experiencing an acceleration, then it is inertial.

Normally that would be true, but you and jroa have shown that not to be true in your criticism against me.

This still doesn't change the fact that you fell for quite possibly the most obvious trap that has ever been set in the history of traps.

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on January 10, 2016, 09:47:33 PM

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on January 08, 2016, 09:34:42 AM

There's still no explanation for differences in said acceleration around the world.

Since the acceleration is smaller as you climb a mountain and as you near the Equator, it means the UA is as stupid as the flat earth.

But hey, let's wait for the wrongineer to come up with another trolling text trying to ignore all that.

As predicted, FE pretenders still can't answer this.

How can the "plane of Earth" accelerate upwards at different rates around the world?

Are you still having trouble understanding Special Relativity?  Maybe you still think that the Earth would be traveling faster than light speed with its acceleration?

Normally people wouldn't be happy to be a coward. You on the other hand, embrace it.

Quote from: jroa on January 10, 2016, 10:24:00 PM

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on January 10, 2016, 09:47:33 PM

Quote from: Kirk Johnson on January 08, 2016, 09:34:42 AM

There's still no explanation for differences in said acceleration around the world.

Since the acceleration is smaller as you climb a mountain and as you near the Equator, it means the UA is as stupid as the flat earth.

But hey, let's wait for the wrongineer to come up with another trolling text trying to ignore all that.

As predicted, FE pretenders still can't answer this.

How can the "plane of Earth" accelerate upwards at different rates around the world?

Are you still having trouble understanding Special Relativity?  Maybe you still think that the Earth would be traveling faster than light speed with its acceleration?

Which part of Special Relativity explains why the acceleration is weaker at the top of the Everest? Can you provide scientific material to back up that stupid claim?

Quote from: sokarul on January 11, 2016, 07:56:04 PM

Normally people wouldn't be happy to be a coward. You on the other hand, embrace it.

Seriously, you are pathetic.  I've heard better come-backs from my 5 year old.   

Quote from: sokarul on January 11, 2016, 07:56:04 PM

Normally people wouldn't be happy to be a coward. You on the other hand, embrace it.

Seriously, you are pathetic.  I've heard better come-backs from my 5 year old.   

Quote from: TheEngineer on January 11, 2016, 08:51:53 PM

Quote from: sokarul on January 11, 2016, 07:56:04 PM

Normally people wouldn't be happy to be a coward. You on the other hand, embrace it.

Seriously, you are pathetic.  I've heard better come-backs from my 5 year old.   

You two need to get a room.

Quote from: Brouwer on January 10, 2016, 12:31:00 AM

Gravitational forces and how convinient they are is an irrelevant part of the topic. We are discussing UA only.

You made a ridiculous statement, which I illustrated with an example, but it's irrelevant?  As long as you now realize that your statement was ridiculous, we can move on, until it comes up again.

Quote

What step function? The cylinder-shape simply meant that the higher the slice of the cylinder is, the less efficient the shield is. This follows from your "nearly fully collapsed" statement.

A cylinder goes from an open internal volume to a closed container in a step function.

Quote

How the Sun, supposedly (acceleration vector is not normal) affected by the UA, can revolve around the north pole's axis?

There is a component to the acceleration vector that is normal to the FE and equal to the acceleration of the FE.  Otherwise, the FE would eventually have run into the Sun.

Quote

To remain perfect upward acceleration, the center of mass can never change. If it changed, we would either accelerate in different direction (new "upward") or the disc would move tilted. Which one is correct?

You are assuming that the DE does not provide a self-righting mechanism.  Which would be obviously wrong.  Otherwise, we would all be dead.

How does the UA know the mass of objects? How does it control it's force so objects of different mass accelerate at the same rate?

Your comparision to RE stuff was a classic fail tactic presented by some people here to avoid direct answer to the question they do not know the answer for. Now I see exactly the same comparision from you. How is that not ridiculous? Are you unable to provide a FE answer?

So the shield has clear border where it collapses no nothing? Well, that would not make any sense either. And would contradict measurements of g rate at higher altitudes.

A component? Wait, I do not see any information regarding vector components in your description.

Also this imply that there are objects directly above the Earth that are, again, not affected by UA for all of the time, since their normal COMPONENT is less than 9.8m/s^2. Why? Because some objects revolving above are supposed to change their altitude. But that is the topic for other discussion - the existance of magic force that allows them revolving and changing their altitude.

Please provide the "self-righting mechanism" description and how it works. And proof of its existance.

You said you don't like something about the FE because it was convenient.  By that same reasoning, you must not like all the things about the RE because they are convenient.  Otherwise, you are a hypocrite.  Are you a hypocrite?

Quote

So the shield has clear border where it collapses no nothing? Well, that would not make any sense either. And would contradict measurements of g rate at higher altitudes.

What the hell are you talking about?  Can you please keep your argument straight?  You said it would have to be like a cylinder, not me.

Quote

A component? Wait, I do not see any information regarding vector components in your description.

Then I guess you can't read.

Quote

Also this imply that there are objects directly above the Earth that are, again, not affected by UA for all of the time, since their normal COMPONENT is less than 9.8m/s^2. Why? Because some objects revolving above are supposed to change their altitude. But that is the topic for other discussion - the existance of magic force that allows them revolving and changing their altitude.

The Dark Energy Field.

Quote

Please provide the "self-righting mechanism" description and how it works. And proof of its existance.

The shape of the FE itself and the interaction with the DEF could be one way to provide this mechanism.  Plus, if it didn't, we would not be around to know it.

Quote from: TheEngineer on January 13, 2016, 07:38:07 PM

You said you don't like something about the FE because it was convenient.  By that same reasoning, you must not like all the things about the RE because they are convenient.  Otherwise, you are a hypocrite.  Are you a hypocrite?

This part of the conversation is over.

The shield collapses at certain altitude. If the collapse is uniform around the Earth, the shield forms cylinder. If the shield collapses from full to nothing in a matter of short distance, then we can say we have our step function. If it collapses slowly over long distance to nothing, then we don't.

Do you have ANY proof for any case? We can even abandon the cylinder shape for the dome shape. Or any that you like.

Please quote the relevant part where you explicitly state anything regarding components.

2.  Is there an acceleration vector normal to the FE equal to #1?  Yes, go to #3.  No, go to #5.

You have your magic, which is far more complicated that the magic posed in your description.

Which part of Special Relativity explains why the acceleration is weaker at the top of the Everest? Can you provide scientific material to back up that stupid claim?

In our case, the top of the Earth moves slightly slower than its bottom.

Ah, which explains why the earth tore itself to pieces billions of years ago 

In our case, the top of the Earth moves slightly slower than its bottom.