Why isn't the magnetic north at geometrical north?

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

Just do a google image search on the subject.  Easiest explanation.

Just do a google image search on the subject.  Easiest explanation.

Thanks. Information and learning. A nice change here for once.

Æter.

According to ancient and medieval science, aether (Greek: αἰθήρ aithēr), also spelled æther or ether, also called quintessence, is the material that fills the region of the universe above the terrestrial sphere. The concept of aether was used in several theories to explain several natural phenomena, such as the traveling of light and gravity. In the late 19th century, physicists postulated that aether permeated all throughout space, providing a medium through which light could travel in a vacuum, but evidence for the presence of such a medium was not found in the Michelson–Morley experiment.

- Wikipedia

oh DEAR ME- you have convinced me. You quoted WIKIPEDIA... the fount of all knowledge...I am not LONGER a FE but am now a ROUND HEAD. I cannot stand before such geyser of profundity as Wikepedia. 
You should start a forum where you do nothing but ask and answer questions.  Within a week the traffic to such a site would probably bring down all the servers in the United Kingdom.

Quote from: sircool on March 07, 2016, 11:14:41 AM

Æter.

According to ancient and medieval science, aether (Greek: αἰθήρ aithēr), also spelled æther or ether, also called quintessence, is the material that fills the region of the universe above the terrestrial sphere. The concept of aether was used in several theories to explain several natural phenomena, such as the traveling of light and gravity. In the late 19th century, physicists postulated that aether permeated all throughout space, providing a medium through which light could travel in a vacuum, but evidence for the presence of such a medium was not found in the Michelson–Morley experiment.

- Wikipedia

oh DEAR ME- you have convinced me. You quoted WIKIPEDIA... the fount of all knowledge...I am not LONGER a FE but am now a ROUND HEAD. I cannot stand before such geyser of profundity as Wikepedia. 
You should start a forum where you do nothing but ask and answer questions.  Within a week the traffic to such a site would probably bring down all the servers in the United Kingdom.

Do you know you could actually go to wiki and write something if you think the info is wrong? It's for everyone so stop bitching.

Do you know you could actually go to wiki and write something if you think the info is wrong? It's for everyone so stop bitching.

It is not as easy as you make it out to be.  Even Danial Shenton (president of The Flat Earth Society) had to jump through a lot of loops in order to make a correction on the article about The Flat Earth Society. 

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 14, 2016, 12:42:18 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

All of which has nothing to do with there being a celestial NP and Mag NP.

From the maps I have seen of FE it would be impossible to have two poles.

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 10:06:25 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 14, 2016, 12:42:18 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

All of which has nothing to do with there being a celestial NP and Mag NP.

From the maps I have seen of FE it would be impossible to have two poles.

This has been discussed before, and I believe someone has given a model in the past that shows how this functions. As I have said earlier, the south magnetic pole is roughly below the North Pole. The north magnetic pole is below this.

Take a bar magnet and a compass and a round peice of cardboard.  Place the magnet underneath with the desired end touching the bottom of the board.  Take the compass and move it about the top of the board.  Record your results and examine them.

Make sure to use a large enough bar magnet.

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 15, 2016, 10:15:40 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 10:06:25 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 14, 2016, 12:42:18 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

All of which has nothing to do with there being a celestial NP and Mag NP.

From the maps I have seen of FE it would be impossible to have two poles.

This has been discussed before, and I believe someone has given a model in the past that shows how this functions. As I have said earlier, the south magnetic pole is roughly below the North Pole. The north magnetic pole is below this.

If the north pole is a magnet then why does it shift?
Also this do not explain the south pole

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 11:03:20 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 15, 2016, 10:15:40 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 10:06:25 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 14, 2016, 12:42:18 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

All of which has nothing to do with there being a celestial NP and Mag NP.

From the maps I have seen of FE it would be impossible to have two poles.

This has been discussed before, and I believe someone has given a model in the past that shows how this functions. As I have said earlier, the south magnetic pole is roughly below the North Pole. The north magnetic pole is below this.

If the north pole is a magnet then why does it shift?
Also this do not explain the south pole

I just explained the south pole. What exactly is the issue?

Quote from: sircool on March 15, 2016, 11:17:02 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 11:03:20 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 15, 2016, 10:15:40 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 10:06:25 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 14, 2016, 12:42:18 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:42:16 AM

The geographic north pole is actually the south pole of the magnet. It seems like no one in this thread understands this.

North is south? Or are you pointing out that the "south" of a magnet points to the North Magnetic Pole? Otherwise this goes against everything I learned in the military about cross country land navigation AND what I learned about flight nav in Flight School.

Being I was NEVER lost, it is safe to say my schooling in both were correct.

A quick google reminds us of the round earth model:
"the magnetic pole near earth's geographic north pole is actually the south magnetic pole. When it comes to magnets, opposites attract. This fact means that the north end of a magnet in a compass is attracted to the south magnetic pole, which lies close to the geographic north pole "

All of which has nothing to do with there being a celestial NP and Mag NP.

From the maps I have seen of FE it would be impossible to have two poles.

This has been discussed before, and I believe someone has given a model in the past that shows how this functions. As I have said earlier, the south magnetic pole is roughly below the North Pole. The north magnetic pole is below this.

If the north pole is a magnet then why does it shift?
Also this do not explain the south pole

I just explained the south pole. What exactly is the issue?

"As I have said earlier, the south magnetic pole is roughly below the North Pole. The north magnetic pole is below this."

Then how can you believe it's flat? If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

My problem is on every FET map dealing with the Earth's Magnet Poles, they all show parallel magic lines that match up with the Polaris NP. Here in Indiana, Correction, here in Columbus, IN the variation is 2 degrees West on the Flight Charts.  That means if I want to fly to Polairs NP I have to add 2 degrees to my Mag Compass or I'll end up at the Mag NP, a long ways from where I wanted to be. In Los Angeles CA, I'd have to subtract 18 degrees to fly to the same destination.

This proves that the FE Mag maps I have seen are wrong. They don't show  the Mag NP as being different from the Polaris NP.  And as far as I can work out on an FE map, it is impossible to have a Polaris NP AND a Mag NP.

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

The "mathematical pole" is the exacter center of the circle directly below the star Polaris while Magnetic pole is, is in Canada.

If you took a compass and didn't make the correction for variation you would never end up where you wanted to be, UNLESS you started from an Isogonic Line of 0 degrees and traveled ONLY north or south along that line.

http://airplanegroundschools.com/Navigation/Figure%2014-6.%20A%20typical%20isogonic%20chart.%20The%20black%20lines%20are%20isogonic%20lines%20which%20connect%20geographic%20points%20with%20identical%20magnetic%20variation.JPG

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

Quote from: sircool on March 16, 2016, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

No it does not go away it get worse. The magnetic NP is located in a different place than the Polaris NP and it keeps moving to different places, even managing at times to completely flip the polarity.

Quote from: John Davis on March 21, 2016, 08:24:11 AM

Quote from: sircool on March 16, 2016, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

No it does not go away it get worse. The magnetic NP is located in a different place than the Polaris NP and it keeps moving to different places, even managing at times to completely flip the polarity.

Why would magnetism have any issues in this model: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Davis+Model#A_Flat_Earth_Theory

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 21, 2016, 08:51:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 21, 2016, 08:24:11 AM

Quote from: sircool on March 16, 2016, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

No it does not go away it get worse. The magnetic NP is located in a different place than the Polaris NP and it keeps moving to different places, even managing at times to completely flip the polarity.

Why would magnetism have any issues in this model: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Davis+Model#A_Flat_Earth_Theory

Because the Man NP and Polaris NP are not that close to gather. Here where I live there is a 2 degree West difference.  In Los Angeles there is an 18 East degree difference. That makes a 20 degree total difference.

That is a hell of a change in just over 1600 miles in the location differences between the P NP and  M NP. There is a common term for not accounting for the different, LOST

Quote from: John Davis on March 22, 2016, 07:57:06 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 21, 2016, 08:51:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 21, 2016, 08:24:11 AM

Quote from: sircool on March 16, 2016, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

No it does not go away it get worse. The magnetic NP is located in a different place than the Polaris NP and it keeps moving to different places, even managing at times to completely flip the polarity.

Why would magnetism have any issues in this model: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Davis+Model#A_Flat_Earth_Theory

Because the Man NP and Polaris NP are not that close to gather. Here where I live there is a 2 degree West difference.  In Los Angeles there is an 18 East degree difference. That makes a 20 degree total difference.

That is a hell of a change in just over 1600 miles in the location differences between the P NP and  M NP. There is a common term for not accounting for the different, LOST

I'm sorry, but I don't think you understand the model you are trying to argue against. Magnetism, like almost every other phenomena, works exactly the same in this model. To prove it wrong for my theory would essentially be proving round earth theory incorrect as well.

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 22, 2016, 01:33:06 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 22, 2016, 07:57:06 AM

Quote from: Round and Proud on March 21, 2016, 08:51:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 21, 2016, 08:24:11 AM

Quote from: sircool on March 16, 2016, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 12:12:09 PM

It acts identically for wherever you are on a flat earth.

Quote

If it's a giant magnet inside earth, then the earth must be round, or else the south magnetic field wouldn't act as a mathematical pole.

Please explain why. The field lines would line up perfectly with common everyday observation.

Because a mathematical pole is a point. And the circumference of a circle, is not. That is the explanation why.

Irrelevant. It will function as a pole as the field lines are close enough to identical. Also: mathematical poles are points. Points don't exist, nor do mathematical poles. Why are we talking about fictions?

Of course this issue melts away in my model, however you asked for the standard explanation. This is it. The north pole is below the North pole and at such a distance away and magnitude that the field lines allow magnetic phenomena to function in a similar manner as expected by RE models.

No it does not go away it get worse. The magnetic NP is located in a different place than the Polaris NP and it keeps moving to different places, even managing at times to completely flip the polarity.

Why would magnetism have any issues in this model: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Davis+Model#A_Flat_Earth_Theory

Because the Man NP and Polaris NP are not that close to gather. Here where I live there is a 2 degree West difference.  In Los Angeles there is an 18 East degree difference. That makes a 20 degree total difference.

That is a hell of a change in just over 1600 miles in the location differences between the P NP and  M NP. There is a common term for not accounting for the different, LOST

I'm sorry, but I don't think you understand the model you are trying to argue against. Magnetism, like almost every other phenomena, works exactly the same in this model. To prove it wrong for my theory would essentially be proving round earth theory incorrect as well.

The maps of FET with magnetic lines posted here show the M NP and P NP as the same location. They are NOT.

Maybe your FE map shows the difference? But that beings up more problem. There are no set rules for FET,  they are as varied as there are people that believe in it.

Your map may show the difference in poles

Other maps don't show any difference in the poles

Round planets but only Earth is flat

All planets are flat

All plants are the same size

Earth is bigger than all the other planets

E=MC² works

E=MC<sup>2 is "Voodoo" and nuclear bombs are fantasy

UA  doesn't mean the Earth is traveling at 99.9999999999999 of C

UA doesn't apply to E=MC2

UA does apply to  E=MC2 but time dilation  doesn't.

Rockets cannot work in a vacuum because a vacuum has nothing in it, but a Gulfstream traveling at 508 mph can reflect a light off the vacuum to make people think the ISS is really there and traveling more that 30 times as fast as the plane.

Mass is not related to gravity

Mass is related to gravity.

Math proves Newton' laws

Math won't work when dealing with a vacuum.

Trigonometry work on Earth but the universe is too big for its use.

The universe is very very small.

I could write a 1000 pages of contradictions about FET just from these forums.

Debating FET is like attempting to tie down tornado with a length of thread. The rules change to fit the belief of the person being asked questions.

HOWEVER this place is  great source for story ideas.</sup>

Nobody has posted a flat Earth map with flux lines.  You are just making up claims again.  Strawman much? 

Nobody has posted a flat Earth map with flux lines.  You are just making up claims again.  Strawman much? 

Because you said so right?

Quote from: jroa on March 23, 2016, 05:09:04 PM

Nobody has posted a flat Earth map with flux lines.  You are just making up claims again.  Strawman much? 

Because you said so right?

Care to provide evidence against what I said?  I will gladly admit I was wrong if you do. 

But that beings up more problem. There are no set rules for FET,  they are as varied as there are people that believe in it.

If you were trying to explore a country with roads, would you proceed down one path or would you instead proceed down all the paths you find?

We saw this in ancient Greece and we still use much of the science and reasoning put in place then. Why do you think pigeon holing our view actually strengthens it? All it does is entrench possibly incorrect views.