end of FE?

  • 46 Replies
  • 6311 Views
?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
end of FE?
« on: December 05, 2016, 04:24:39 PM »
 would this be the end of the FE?



sorry, i don't know how to post vids correctly on here.

so for those too lazy to watch the vid, the idea is that a satellite would lower a cable down to earth that would be attached to a platform. an elevator would then be attached to said cable that would carry shuttles into orbit rather than needing to use rockets. the idea is that like a person spinning a yoyo in an "orbit" around their hand gives the yoyo's string rigidity, the rotation of the earth would give rigidity to the cable.

i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability, so suppose in the next 20 years such an elevator were to be built. wouldn't that mean the end of FE theory if anyone could just go look at the huge cable running straight up into the sky?
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • The Elder Ones
  • 50933
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2016, 04:32:21 PM »
I would make much more sense for that to even be possible on a flat earth.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2016, 04:36:43 PM »
I would make much more sense for that to even be possible on a flat earth.

how so, how could anything just sit in the sky without being in orbit. and if that's possible why do you guys deny satellites?
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • The Elder Ones
  • 50933
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2016, 04:39:08 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

disputeone

  • 25621
  • Or should I?
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2016, 04:45:39 PM »
what will we use as a lifting point for the elevator?
Skyhook?
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns. 

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2016, 04:52:47 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.

at least 3 times a month someone makes the case for ground based gps and such
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • The Elder Ones
  • 50933
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #6 on: December 05, 2016, 04:59:26 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.

at least 3 times a month someone makes the case for ground based gps and such

Well something is flying around up there.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #7 on: December 05, 2016, 05:00:50 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.

at least 3 times a month someone makes the case for ground based gps and such

Well something is flying around up there.

then you are the first FE theorist i've seen accept the existence of satellites.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

Re: end of FE?
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2016, 05:12:30 PM »
what will we use as a lifting point for the elevator?
Skyhook?
Well in that case you'll certainly need a wall stretcher as well.
Sounds like a job for Intikam..

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2016, 05:14:26 PM »
Well since pics and vids from space is denied so will this if it is ever done.

Similar how some FE's think some commercial flights are faked, that a lot of people involved in the Earth sciences are lying, one of the most tested and validated thing in science, gravity, is a lie, etc

?

Woody

  • 1144
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2016, 05:19:13 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.

at least 3 times a month someone makes the case for ground based gps and such

Well something is flying around up there.

then you are the first FE theorist i've seen accept the existence of satellites.

Some do accept satellites. ust that they do not orbit like we are told.

I have seen a couple here or the other site claim aether whirlpools/winds exist above us. That is what causes satellites appear to orbit like we are told they do.

Re: end of FE?
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2016, 06:22:02 PM »
Well, it is your hand attached to the string swinging the yoyo, so that would be the equivalent of a satellite using the elevator to swing the Earth, this hypothesis seems backwards to me, not to mention physically impossible.

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2016, 07:15:55 PM »
Well, it is your hand attached to the string swinging the yoyo, so that would be the equivalent of a satellite using the elevator to swing the Earth, this hypothesis seems backwards to me, not to mention physically impossible.

i don't want to insult your intelligence, so i'm gonna assume you're joking. the satellite is the yoyo in the metaphor, being swung around by the rotation of the earth.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2016, 07:30:50 PM »
We don't deny satellites, we deny that they are in orbit.

at least 3 times a month someone makes the case for ground based gps and such

Well something is flying around up there.

then you are the first FE theorist i've seen accept the existence of satellites.
Try John Davis.
          Insistence on an "Accurate" map is a rhetorical trick. « Reply #355 on: August 30, 2016, 04:58:15 AM »
                           With a non-Euclidean Earth and the ::) Ferrari Effect  ::) anything can be explained.
                           Though, some research on Leo Ferrari and
                          "In search of the edge : an inquiry into the shape of the earth and the disappearance of Andrea Barns" might be warranted.
          Flat Earth General / Re: Trigonometry of the stars to create a map « Message by John Davis on August 19, 2016, 10:03:03 PM »
  and EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY PROVES THE EARTH IS FLAT. said "Ferrari Effect" reference.
It might make some interesting reading at least.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 26236
  • The Only Yang Scholar in Ying Universe
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2016, 11:12:56 PM »
Ok then.

1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Ignored:

Jura II (until 2031)
Bulma (Until 2030)
Jackblack (Until 2032)

I’m I a globalist AI.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30075
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2016, 12:04:57 AM »
would this be the end of the FE?



sorry, i don't know how to post vids correctly on here.

so for those too lazy to watch the vid, the idea is that a satellite would lower a cable down to earth that would be attached to a platform. an elevator would then be attached to said cable that would carry shuttles into orbit rather than needing to use rockets. the idea is that like a person spinning a yoyo in an "orbit" around their hand gives the yoyo's string rigidity, the rotation of the earth would give rigidity to the cable.

i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability, so suppose in the next 20 years such an elevator were to be built. wouldn't that mean the end of FE theory if anyone could just go look at the huge cable running straight up into the sky?
Yeah, maybe they can swing a big heavy weight off it like a pendulum, using maybe an aircraft carrier as the weight.
Just for fun of course. I mean these scientists can do anything.

Why not just build a star trek, beam me up contraption and just send up all kinds of craft.
How about tying lots and lots of window cleaners ladders together to enable people to climb to space...obviously with  a cannister of oxygen on their backs.

Maybe build a big city inside a balloon and send that up into story book space to float to different story book planets where eventually in 26 zillion years it can land on a new one with apples as big as your head and water falls made of chocolate, with Jack Daniel's rainfall.

« Last Edit: December 06, 2016, 12:08:08 AM by sceptimatic »

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2016, 12:26:38 AM »
would this be the end of the FE?



sorry, i don't know how to post vids correctly on here.

so for those too lazy to watch the vid, the idea is that a satellite would lower a cable down to earth that would be attached to a platform. an elevator would then be attached to said cable that would carry shuttles into orbit rather than needing to use rockets. the idea is that like a person spinning a yoyo in an "orbit" around their hand gives the yoyo's string rigidity, the rotation of the earth would give rigidity to the cable.

i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability, so suppose in the next 20 years such an elevator were to be built. wouldn't that mean the end of FE theory if anyone could just go look at the huge cable running straight up into the sky?
Yeah, maybe they can swing a big heavy weight off it like a pendulum, using maybe an aircraft carrier as the weight.
Just for fun of course. I mean these scientists can do anything.

Why not just build a star trek, beam me up contraption and just send up all kinds of craft.
How about tying lots and lots of window cleaners ladders together to enable people to climb to space...obviously with  a cannister of oxygen on their backs.

Maybe build a big city inside a balloon and send that up into story book space to float to different story book planets where eventually in 26 zillion years it can land on a new one with apples as big as your head and water falls made of chocolate, with Jack Daniel's rainfall.

nice strawman, however all the pyshics mentioned in the video checks out. maybe it's impossible but this is where we are headed so should it be successful, how would the FE model explain it?
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

JackBlack

  • 23751
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2016, 12:36:29 AM »
To discuss its viability the first thing to figure out is the stress on the cable and see if that is practicle.

I can't easily do the math off the top of my head, so I'm not going to try here. It also varies depending on the specific cable geometry (e.g do you have a cylindrical cable, with the same cross section all the way, or do you design it so it tapers to a point and have it much thicker in the middle (the more viable option in terms of strength).

The key thing to remember is that this cable must be able to hold its entire "weight" (i.e. the force acting on the cable due to gravity and the rotation of Earth), all the way from Earth to a geostationary/geosynchronous orbit, which has a height of 35786 km (which means we need a cable that is 35786 km long, this is the second issue, but is more of a challenge to meet and thus isn't the most important as it is just a case of dealing with a massive cable rather than physical limitations which can't be overcome, and gives us an idea of where to start). The part which makes the math hard is that the weight decreases as you go up and the variable cross section.

The force acting on a particular piece of cable is given by:
F=m*(-GM/r^2+omega^2*r). (taking note that a negative force means being pulled to Earth, a positive force means being flung away).

So lets simplify it a bit.
Lets say we have a constant cross section, A.
We will also make a rough estimate by going half way and using that as the force for the entire cable.
That makes our r for the above equation 24271100 m, and thus the force is -0.548276631*mass N/kg.
We also know the length (l) required (35786 km or 35786000 m).
We can let the density be p (can't be bothered typing rho).
The total mass would be A*l*p.

Thus the total force would be -19620627.52*A*p N m/kg (which can also be taken to mean tension).
To find the stress, that would be the force divided by the area, so -19620627.52*p N m/kg.

(for a sanity check, the force should be in units of N, while the stress should be in units of N/m^2 (or Pa), and the units of density can be kg/m^3.
Using the above, ignoring values and just subbing in units, for force we get m^2 (kg/m^3) N m/kg, after cancelling this gives us N.
For stress, we have (kg/m^3) N m/kg. After cancelling that gives us N/m^2.)

So this means the tensile strength, in Pa, needs to be 19620627.52 times as much as the density, in kg/m^3.
Another option is to look at the speficic strength/stress, which is the stress divided by the density.
This means we need a specific stress of 19620627.52 N m/kg. This can also be expressed as 19620.62752 kN m/kg or 19.62062752 MN m/kg

Some values of this for common materials (rather than list full units, I will just put down the prefix, e.g. k or M):
Steel - 61.1k
Nylon - 69l
Titanium - 76k
Titanium alloy - 260k
Alluminium alloys - 115k
Spider silk - 1.069M
Carbon fibre - 2.4M
Kevlar - 2.5M

So no common material comes close (and i'm fairly confident this is a significant underestimate, as if you just look at it at 10000 km up, if you use the force at that point and the cable below that point, that alone gives you a requirement of 14 M. For the same thing at 1000 km up, it gives 7 M).

The only materials known (at least outside of very niche groups) which come close are things like carbon nanotubes, with a specific strength of 46 M.
However, that is typically single carbon nano-tubes. When you combine it into a rope, that drops. However there are also imperfections in the process.
The theoretical tensile strength is 300 GPa, but typically achieved values are closer to 60 GPa, but when made into ropes it drops to single digit GPa.

So in order for it to be possible, we need to get a lot better at making very long carbon nanotubes.

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #18 on: December 06, 2016, 12:43:38 AM »
To discuss its viability the first thing to figure out is the stress on the cable and see if that is practicle.

I can't easily do the math off the top of my head, so I'm not going to try here. It also varies depending on the specific cable geometry (e.g do you have a cylindrical cable, with the same cross section all the way, or do you design it so it tapers to a point and have it much thicker in the middle (the more viable option in terms of strength).

The key thing to remember is that this cable must be able to hold its entire "weight" (i.e. the force acting on the cable due to gravity and the rotation of Earth), all the way from Earth to a geostationary/geosynchronous orbit, which has a height of 35786 km (which means we need a cable that is 35786 km long, this is the second issue, but is more of a challenge to meet and thus isn't the most important as it is just a case of dealing with a massive cable rather than physical limitations which can't be overcome, and gives us an idea of where to start). The part which makes the math hard is that the weight decreases as you go up and the variable cross section.

The force acting on a particular piece of cable is given by:
F=m*(-GM/r^2+omega^2*r). (taking note that a negative force means being pulled to Earth, a positive force means being flung away).

So lets simplify it a bit.
Lets say we have a constant cross section, A.
We will also make a rough estimate by going half way and using that as the force for the entire cable.
That makes our r for the above equation 24271100 m, and thus the force is -0.548276631*mass N/kg.
We also know the length (l) required (35786 km or 35786000 m).
We can let the density be p (can't be bothered typing rho).
The total mass would be A*l*p.

Thus the total force would be -19620627.52*A*p N m/kg (which can also be taken to mean tension).
To find the stress, that would be the force divided by the area, so -19620627.52*p N m/kg.

(for a sanity check, the force should be in units of N, while the stress should be in units of N/m^2 (or Pa), and the units of density can be kg/m^3.
Using the above, ignoring values and just subbing in units, for force we get m^2 (kg/m^3) N m/kg, after cancelling this gives us N.
For stress, we have (kg/m^3) N m/kg. After cancelling that gives us N/m^2.)

So this means the tensile strength, in Pa, needs to be 19620627.52 times as much as the density, in kg/m^3.
Another option is to look at the speficic strength/stress, which is the stress divided by the density.
This means we need a specific stress of 19620627.52 N m/kg. This can also be expressed as 19620.62752 kN m/kg or 19.62062752 MN m/kg

Some values of this for common materials (rather than list full units, I will just put down the prefix, e.g. k or M):
Steel - 61.1k
Nylon - 69l
Titanium - 76k
Titanium alloy - 260k
Alluminium alloys - 115k
Spider silk - 1.069M
Carbon fibre - 2.4M
Kevlar - 2.5M

So no common material comes close (and i'm fairly confident this is a significant underestimate, as if you just look at it at 10000 km up, if you use the force at that point and the cable below that point, that alone gives you a requirement of 14 M. For the same thing at 1000 km up, it gives 7 M).

The only materials known (at least outside of very niche groups) which come close are things like carbon nanotubes, with a specific strength of 46 M.
However, that is typically single carbon nano-tubes. When you combine it into a rope, that drops. However there are also imperfections in the process.
The theoretical tensile strength is 300 GPa, but typically achieved values are closer to 60 GPa, but when made into ropes it drops to single digit GPa.

So in order for it to be possible, we need to get a lot better at making very long carbon nanotubes.

yeah... like 5 minutes of the video explains that.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

1on0ne

  • 156
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #19 on: December 06, 2016, 02:51:45 AM »
well people would see a huge tube going up and everybody would thik it goes to "space" but that would not prove anything : who would've use the evelevator anyway? NASA?
live fearlessly, love endlessly

Re: end of FE?
« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2016, 03:02:51 AM »
...
i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability, ...
Can't you guys read? :)

... so suppose in the next 20 years such an elevator were to be built. wouldn't that mean the end of FE theory if anyone could just go look at the huge cable running straight up into the sky?
Yes, you would think so, that ppl would get more enlighted with more technology, but i suspect FE will only dig in much deeper.
Imho the technology is advancing too fast, does not have time to sink in, in average-joe's brains. The discoveries and technology will seem impossible, because they will be harder to understand so our brains will more easily susceptible to things that we can grasp, ie a flat earth. So FE might even increase because of this!
I really hope i am wrong but the latest development in the world has made me wonder...

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2016, 03:38:47 AM »
well people would see a huge tube going up and everybody would thik it goes to "space" but that would not prove anything : who would've use the evelevator anyway? NASA?

that would definitely prove something. you can look up at the tallest skyscraper in the world and see the top. said skyscraper has a very intricate design so as to allow it to stand tall under massive turgor pressure and torsion caused by wind and other outside forces. if a ribbon were to be extended straight up as far as the eye can see, be assured, there is something at the top of it holding it up.

and it costs several million dollars to send someone into orbit at the moment. such an elevator would reduce that figure into the tens of thousands. obviously

i'm actually amazed that given a scenario which hasn't happened but could possibly happen, that wouldn't work in you're worldview, you would disqualify the scenario rather than consider how it would affect your world view. i assure you that if i saw the edge of the earth, or measured the distance around antarctica and it were waaaaaaay longer than it should be or watched several rockets crash into the dome, i'd start seriously considering and researching FE theory and change my mind. i definitely wouldn't try and justify or deny the evidence to match my knowledge.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

Re: end of FE?
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2016, 06:46:55 PM »
Okay maybe I didn't explain myself too well, what I meant was it would have to be an awfully big satellite otherwise it would just be like swinging a very long string.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2016, 06:53:00 PM »
Stratolites are very real. 

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2016, 07:06:10 PM »
i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability,

. . . however all the pyshics mentioned in the video checks out.


You are truly awesome, sir.


?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #25 on: December 06, 2016, 07:15:14 PM »
Yes. Yes it is sir!
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2016, 07:19:25 PM »
i don't know the exact math behind it so i don't really want to debate it's viability,

. . . however all the pyshics mentioned in the video checks out.


You are truly awesome, sir.

physics don't equal math and i think you know that. just because i don't know the exact math behind something doesn't mean i'm not capable of generally saying "under the laws of physics as i know them, this idea would work in theory"

the reason i said that is because i wanted to focus on how the FES would respond to such a thing if it were to happen, not if it is possible.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • 17774
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2016, 07:37:02 PM »
Well, determing whether the space elevator is viable means figuring out how much tension the "string" part of the elevator will be under, and then engineering a solution that exceeds that by a certain safety threshold, so the math does get important when determining if what you saw in the video is practical or not. It's a lot of tension. And it's not unreasonable to expect someone like sandokhan to show up with a bunch of misapplied math to "disprove" the idea. That's going to be your opposition, when it comes to wondering if this would be the end of FE.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2016, 07:37:13 PM »
just because i don't know the exact math behind something doesn't mean i'm not capable of generally saying "under the laws of physics as i know them, this idea would work in theory"

So, because you don't understand something, it makes sense to you?

?

sir_awesome123

  • 277
  • proud NASA shill
Re: end of FE?
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2016, 07:53:39 PM »
just because i don't know the exact math behind something doesn't mean i'm not capable of generally saying "under the laws of physics as i know them, this idea would work in theory"

So, because you don't understand something, it makes sense to you?

i would like to see where i said i don't understand it. i understand the physics behind it very well, i just don't know the math behind calculating the strength of the carbon nano tubes in a ribbon, or how heavy the actual elevator itself could be or the feasibility of powering it with lasers.

that doesn't mean i don't understand it, i cross a bridge every day before i get to class, i don't know what the deadload of the bridge is and i don't know how much it weight it can bare before breaking but i understand bridges.

i said that because there is no argument to be had about the elevator's feasibility, i accept that it may not work or may not be possible in our lifetimes. the point of my post was to see what it would take to convince you of a round earth. i proposed a possible invention that may come into fruition within the next 50 years that doesn't fit into the current FE model, in order to see if the FES wold change its model or deny the facts.
"hey what are you doing?"
"nothing, just arguing with this dude, he thinks the earth is flat"
"no really, what are you doing?"