Flying to the Moon

  • 82 Replies
  • 8738 Views
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #60 on: December 18, 2017, 01:19:32 PM »
Don't forget about the 4th dimension... Time.

IS TIME THE FOURTH DIMENSION?
Time is often thought of as the fourth dimension.
Time plays a key role as a dimension in mathematical formulations of physical laws and theories such as general relativity and string theory.
https://www.learner.org/courses/mathilluminated/units/5/textbook/03.php
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #61 on: December 18, 2017, 01:26:49 PM »
A GIF image created from a video could show the entire surface... You lose!
So a composite rather than a single photo?
You lose again.

Just because you do the compositing across time rather than space doesn't magically mean it isn't a composite.

Is the surface of the Earth 2D or 3D??? Ass handed to you again! Looks pretty 3D to me in this 2D picture.
By definition the surface of any object is 2D.

A point on the surface is restricted in motion to 2 (non-Euclidean) dimensions. If you move in the third dimension you are no longer on the surface.

If you are 100 m above the surface are you on the surface? NO!

Here is a nice simple definition of a surface:
Quote
a continuous set of points that has length and breadth but no thickness.
So you aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with Google.
Or oxford dictionary:
Quote
Geometry
A continuous set of points that has length and breadth but no thickness.
Or dictionary.com
Quote
Geometry. any figure having only two dimensions; part or all of the boundary of a solid.
or merriam webster:
Quote
: a plane or curved two-dimensional locus of points (such as the boundary of a three-dimensional region) plane surface surface of a sphere

These sure make it seem like a surface is 2D, and unlike you I don't need to blatantly lie about the results.

The Earth, as a physical entity in 3D space, is 3D, but its surface is 2D.

Just like a piece of paper, as it has thickness is in fact 3D, but its surface (or the face of a sheet) is 2D as you are now bound to a set of points and only have 2 degrees of freedom. This still applies if you roll the paper up into a cylinder.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #62 on: December 18, 2017, 01:40:50 PM »
The surface of a sphere is in 3D according to you... So why wouldn't the Earth's surface which has depth also be 3D? I don't even need to respond. I could just post your contradictions. Look your arguing with yourself again... Who is lying here???

These sure make it seem like a surface is 2D, and unlike you I don't need to blatantly lie about the results. The Earth, as a physical entity in 3D space, is 3D, but its surface is 2D.
Remember, a sphere is a 3D object, how can you show a complete sphere in a 2D picture?

Does this look like there is no depth??? Those mountains look pretty high and that valley pretty low... The surface of the Earth is 3D, step in a depression or on a rock for confirmation...




The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

FalseProphet

  • 3696
  • Life is just a tale
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #63 on: December 18, 2017, 01:45:30 PM »
Don't forget about the 4th dimension... Time.

IS TIME THE FOURTH DIMENSION?
Time is often thought of as the fourth dimension.
Time plays a key role as a dimension in mathematical formulations of physical laws and theories such as general relativity and string theory.
https://www.learner.org/courses/mathilluminated/units/5/textbook/03.php

Time is not a spatial dimension. That's why the mathematical relationship between time and any spatial dimension is different than between a spatial dimension and any other spatial dimension (the t-coordinate is imaginary and represented as the product of i*t*c )

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #64 on: December 18, 2017, 02:14:40 PM »
These sure make it seem like a surface is 2D, and unlike you I don't need to blatantly lie about the results.

The Earth, as a physical entity in 3D space, is 3D, but its surface is 2D.

Just like a piece of paper, as it has thickness is in fact 3D, but its surface (or the face of a sheet) is 2D as you are now bound to a set of points and only have 2 degrees of freedom. This still applies if you roll the paper up into a cylinder.

Again, the perimeter is for a 2D shape. Earth is not 2D, thus none have shown the perimeter of Earth as Earth does not have a perimeter.

The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #65 on: December 18, 2017, 02:21:48 PM »
The surface of a sphere is in 3D according to you
No it isn't.
The surface of any object is 2D. The Earth itself is a 3D object. That does't magically mean the surface is 3D.

Try again, this time try and address what has actually been said.

So why wouldn't the Earth's surface which has depth also be 3D?
Again, by definition a surface has no depth.

I don't even need to respond.
Yet you choose to do so and show the world your idiocy yet again.

Does this look like there is no depth???
For the surface, NO!
It is still just a surface.
It is a non-Euclidean 2D surface.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #66 on: December 18, 2017, 02:28:00 PM »
When you never leave the basement and go outside you may start to feel as the World is 2D go outside or at least look out the window. That is the surface of the Earth. If you still think it's 2D... Step off the curb...

You lose your an idiot and all you are doing is wasting time. I'm just baiting you into contradicting yourself more and more. I'm having fun making a fool out of you...
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #67 on: December 18, 2017, 02:32:42 PM »
That is the surface of the Earth. If you still think it's 2D... Step off the curb...
Again, it isn't me, it is the various dictionaries which all clearly indicate that surfaces are 2D.
You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with these dictionaries.

You lose your an idiot and all you are doing is wasting time. I'm just baiting you into contradicting yourself more and more. I'm having fun making a fool out of you...
But you are yet to find a single contradiction.
Meanwhile you have contradicted yourself repeatedly, blatantly lied repeatedly and had your ass repeatedly handed to you.
The only person that you are making a fool of is yourself.

*

Masalang the Torpedo

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 22912
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #68 on: December 18, 2017, 02:33:37 PM »
When you never leave the basement and go outside you may start to feel as the World is 2D go outside or at least look out the window. That is the surface of the Earth. If you still think it's 2D... Step off the curb...

You lose your an idiot and all you are doing is wasting time. I'm just baiting you into contradicting yourself more and more. I'm having fun making a fool out of you...

Actually, he's done a pretty good job in making a fool of you, 2nd only to yourself, but then that is why your here.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #69 on: December 18, 2017, 03:06:17 PM »
A one eyed man is king to the blind...

Meaning just because you're a bigger idiot than he is doesn't mean he isn't also a idiot...

Flight is 3D even if you dipshits are too slow to realize that. If it wasn't we wouldn't need to worry about flying into mountains. The surface of the Earth is the terrain. Don Batemanís terrain mapping device has nearly eliminated the largest cause of death in jetliner accidents. You can't plow into the ground in 2D...

Batemanís Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System became required in most commercial planes around the world, dramatically reducing accidents in which perfectly good aircraft with trained crews plowed into the ground or bodies of water, almost always in poor visibility.

In the 1960s and 1970s, there was an average of one such fatal accident per month, according to the AviationSafetyNetwork website. It was by far the largest cause of death in jetliner accidents...

In the arcane world of aviation terminology, these crashes were called Controlled Flight into Terrain, or CFIT. It was a vexing problem: Basic navigation should have kept pilots from crashing. But the cockpit navigation technology of that era wasnít intuitive and it was too easy to get disoriented, especially at night or in bad weather. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-bateman-airplane-safety-device/




The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #70 on: December 18, 2017, 10:13:09 PM »
Again, it isn't me, it is the various dictionaries which all clearly indicate that surfaces are 2D.
You aren't arguing with me, you are arguing with these dictionaries.

Fundamentals of Surfaces
Some simple examples of 3D surfaces are a landscape
http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/latest/extensions/3d-analyst/fundamentals-of-3d-surfaces.htm




Please post a link to any dictionary that states the surface of the Earth is 2D... The surface of the Earth is 3D, it has depth. There are plenty of other 3D surfaces too, acoustic tile, your keyboard, popcorn ceilings, meat lovers pizza, etc...

3D surface of acoustic tile.



"In the previous two sections weíve looked at lines and planes in three dimensions and while these are used quite heavily at times in a Calculus class there are many other surfaces that are also used fairly regularly" http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/CalcIII/QuadricSurfaces.aspx
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

Masalang the Torpedo

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 22912
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #71 on: December 18, 2017, 11:06:17 PM »
I know you're a troll and all but spamming the same post across multiple threads is a sure way to see your arse bammed

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #72 on: December 18, 2017, 11:25:22 PM »
A one eyed man is king to the blind
Is that why you think you are so great?

Flight is 3D even if you dipshits are too slow to realize that.
Again with the strawmen.
We have never indicated it isn't.
Try to respond to what we say for once.

The surface of the Earth is the terrain.
You are thinking of the crust.

The simple fact is that the surface of Earth is 2D, just like all surfaces.

Please post a link to any dictionary that states the surface of the Earth is 2D...
I already provided dictionary definitions and what dictionary it came from that clearly showed all surfaces are 2D.

By definition, a surface is 2D.

Remember, it isn't me you are arguing with, it is the dictionaries.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #73 on: December 18, 2017, 11:34:38 PM »
You are thinking of the crust. The simple fact is that the surface of Earth is 2D, just like all surfaces.

Please post a link to any dictionary that states the surface of the Earth is 2D...
I already provided dictionary definitions and what dictionary it came from that clearly showed all surfaces are 2D.

By definition, a surface is 2D.

Remember, it isn't me you are arguing with, it is the dictionaries.

Sorry you're wrong... Surface is the outermost or uppermost layer according to the dictionaries. The surface of the Earth is called the lithosphere it's the solid outermost layer of the upper mantle it's very clearly 3D...

Lithosphere, Rigid, rocky outer layer of the Earth, consisting of the crust and the solid outermost layer of the upper mantle. https://www.britannica.com/science/lithosphere

surface [sur-fis]
1.the outer face, outside, or exterior boundary of a thing; outermost or uppermost layer or area.
2.any face of a body or thing:the six surfaces of a cube.
3.extent or area of outer face; superficial area.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/surface


Earthís surface features are the result of constructive and destructive forces. Constructive forces cause landforms to grow. The eruption of a new volcano creates a new landform. Destructive forces wear landforms down. The slow processes of mechanical and chemical weathering and erosion work over time to change once high mountains into smooth flat plateaus. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/geophysical/chapter/earths-surface-features/
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #74 on: December 18, 2017, 11:36:54 PM »
I know you're a troll and all but spamming the same post across multiple threads is a sure way to see your arse bammed

Chupa mi verga puta! It's my threads I'm spamming. Your bullshit is worse than spam...

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 20871
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #75 on: December 19, 2017, 08:43:40 PM »
Are you being home schooled by your uncle Heiwa?

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #76 on: December 21, 2017, 10:41:52 AM »
You are thinking of the crust.

The simple fact is that the surface of Earth is 2D, just like all surfaces.
I already provided dictionary definitions and what dictionary it came from that clearly showed all surfaces are 2D.

By definition, a surface is 2D.

Remember, it isn't me you are arguing with, it is the dictionaries.

First off you are wrong... Your original argument was the path a plane traces on the ground is 2D. It's not, that a line and a line is 1D. Planes don't trace paths onthe ground, they trace then through the air and they have three axes, it's called a flight path since you're too stupid to realize that. The surface of the Earth is curved so a level flightpath will also be curved. Using calculus it is 3D because there is a 3D collection of points.

The surface of the Earth is the lithosphere, it's comprised of the crust AND the upper mantle. You provided one definition of three, for surface from Merriam Webster. It doesn't state ALL surfaces are 2D. Look at definition 3a... Does that even apply to geometry???

Definition of surface
1 : the exterior or upper boundary of an object or body on the surface of the water the earth's surface
2 : a plane or curved two-dimensional locus of points (such as the boundary of a three-dimensional region) plane surface surface of a sphere
3 a : the external or superficial aspect of something trouble lurks below the surface
b : an external part or layer sanded the rough surfaces https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surface


Lithosphere, Rigid, rocky outer layer of the Earth, consisting of the crust and the solid outermost layer of the upper mantle. It extends to a depth of about 60 mi (100 km). https://www.britannica.com/science/lithosphere
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #77 on: December 21, 2017, 12:56:40 PM »
Your original argument was the path a plane traces on the ground is 2D. It's not, that a line and a line is 1D.
No, my original argument was discussing the shape of the line the plane traces on the surface of Earth.
The surface of Earth is 2D, especially when considering a path that is traced.

Planes don't trace paths onthe ground
Sure they do. You take their position as latitude and longitude and discard the altitutde information.
That is the path they trace on the surface of an idealised Earth.

The surface of the Earth is curved so a level flightpath will also be curved.
But not the path when reduced to 2D, as an expression of the flight path along the surface. That then uses non-Euclidean geometry.

You provided one definition of three, for surface from Merriam Webster. It doesn't state ALL surfaces are 2D. Look at definition 3a... Does that even apply to geometry???
Again, we are discussing geometry. As such, we use the definition of surface for geometry.
In geometry, all surfaces are 2D, even curved ones.

Now enough of this tangent BS.

A plane is quite capable of correcting for the Coriolis effect and thus not have it's path curve due to it.

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #78 on: December 21, 2017, 09:44:25 PM »
No, my original argument was discussing the shape of the line the plane traces on the surface of Earth.
The surface of Earth is 2D, especially when considering a path that is traced.

Wrong liar! Your original argument was a straight line FOLLOWING Earth's surface. If you follow the surface you will be going up and down mountains and the sides of buildings...

We were discussing a straight line following Earth's surface

The devil is in the details, you didn't say "the line the plane traces on the surface", you said "a straight line following Earth's surface". A straight line is 1D not 2D, either way you are wrong...

Sure they do. You take their position as latitude and longitude and discard the altitutde information.
That is the path they trace on the surface of an idealised Earth.

If you were concerned with the truth and reality as you claim. Then we cannot discard altitude, it's a vital part of a planes flight path. Planes fly at different altitudes, air traffic controllers most definitely do not discard altitude information and neither can we.

Merriam Webster - flight path: the path in the air or space made or followed by something (such as a particle, an airplane, or a spacecraft) in flight.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flight%20path


But not the path when reduced to 2D, as an expression of the flight path along the surface. That then uses non-Euclidean geometry.

A line is 1D not 2D...

Math World ~ "A line is a straight one-dimensional figure having no thickness and extending infinitely in both directions. A line is sometimes called a straight line or, more archaically, a right line (Casey 1893), to emphasize that it has no "wiggles" anywhere along its length." http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Line.html

Again, we are discussing geometry. As such, we use the definition of surface for geometry.
In geometry, all surfaces are 2D, even curved ones.

Geometrically speaking it would be a 1D line on a 2D surface on a 3D object you dipshit. However the surface of the Earth is the 60m thick lithosphere and it's a geological feature, not a geometrical one.

Macmillan Dictionary ~ geological: relating to geology, or to the features of the Earthís surface https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/geological#geological__1

Encyclopedia Britannica ~ Lithosphere: Rigid, rocky outer layer of the Earth, consisting of the crust and the solid outermost layer of the upper mantle. It extends to a depth of about 60 mi (100 km).
https://www.britannica.com/science/lithosphere


Merriam Webster ~ surface: the exterior or upper boundary of an object or body on the surface of the water the earth's surface.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surface


When measured on the small scale you will find there are mountains and hills and the like.

Either way the imaginary path the planes traces on the ground would be 1D, in reality though planes trace a path through the air... Google flight path, there is only one definition so you shouldn't get confused...

Now enough of this tangent BS. A plane is quite capable of correcting for the Coriolis effect and thus not have it's path curve due to it.

A planes path curves because of the curvature of the earth. A plane never flies in a straight line geometrically speaking. Coriolis force is accounted for.

Just About Flying ~ "Does a jet aircraft need to constantly adjust nose down to follow the curvature of the earth?
In reality, a constant altitude must be kept using the standard pressure and that means a fixed distance to the earth center of gravity is maintained, making the path of the plane a curved one. So, a plane is not flying a straight line - geometrically speaking."  http://www.askcaptainlim.com/flying-the-plane-flying-90/1301-does-a-jet-aircraft-need-to-constantly-adjust-nose-down-to-follow-the-curvature-of-the-earth.html


Exploring Earth ~ "A plane flying from Anchorage, Alaska directly toward Miami, Florida would miss its target due to the Coriolis effect. The target location where the plane was headed when it took off has moved with Earth's rotation, so the plane would end up to the right of its original target." http://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es1904/es1904page01.cfm
In reality, pilots take the Coriolis effect into account so they do not miss their targets
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #79 on: December 22, 2017, 01:15:24 AM »
Wrong liar! Your original argument was a straight line FOLLOWING Earth's surface. If you follow the surface you will be going up and down mountains and the sides of buildings...
Again, there is more than one definition.
I'm not the liar here.
The path of a plane following Earth's surface is that traced onto the surface of Earth.

A straight line is 1D not 2D, either way you are wrong...
Where have I said a line is 2D?

If you were concerned with the truth and reality as you claim. Then we cannot discard altitude, it's a vital part of a planes flight path.
Not all information is relevant to every discussion.


Now then, are you going to admit that planes can correct for the Coriolis effect and that the Coriolis effect does not mean planes can't fly in straight lines?
Or are you only capable of going off on irrelevant tangents to try and avoid admitting you were wrong?

Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #80 on: December 22, 2017, 12:05:16 PM »
Again, there is more than one definition.
I'm not the liar here.

It sure appears you are the liar...

The simple fact is that the surface of Earth is 2D, just like all surfaces. I already provided dictionary definitions and what dictionary it came from that clearly showed all surfaces are 2D. By definition, a surface is 2D.

So is there more than one definition of surface or is there only one as you previously claimed???

Where have I said a line is 2D?

Here...

We are looking at the flight track on the surface of Earth, i.e. the line the flight path traces over the surface of Earth. That does not have depth as it is limited to 2D.

Here...

A straight line following Earth's surface i.e a great circle is not straight because the Earth is curved.
But following the Earth's surface, i.e. in 2D, it is straight.

And here...

I have always been discussing the path it traces on the surface of Earth. By definition that only has two spatial dimensions.

Not only have you contradicted yourself this time, you have also been caught lying about it...

Not all information is relevant to every discussion.

Altitude is irrelevant when discussing flight???

take their position as latitude and longitude and discard the altitutde information

The purveyor of truth strikes again... Just disregard any information that proves you wrong, as it's not relevant even when it's relevant... Your delusions of grandeur don't change the fact you have been proven wrong and a liar... You would think your ass has handles as many times as I handed it to you haha!
« Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 12:25:06 PM by Marvin the Martian »
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #81 on: December 22, 2017, 01:25:16 PM »
The simple fact is that the surface of Earth is 2D, just like all surfaces. I already provided dictionary definitions and what dictionary it came from that clearly showed all surfaces are 2D. By definition, a surface is 2D.
So is there more than one definition of surface or is there only one as you previously claimed???
No, by the definition of surfaces I was using, which is from geometry, all surfaces are 2D.


Where have I said a line is 2D?
Here...
We are looking at the flight track on the surface of Earth, i.e. the line the flight path traces over the surface of Earth. That does not have depth as it is limited to 2D[/b].
Not here. Here I am saying the surface is 2D.

Here...
But following the Earth's surface, i.e. in 2D, it is straight.
Again, not here, the surface is 2D. The line in this 2D surface is straight.

And here...
I have always been discussing the path it traces on the surface of Earth. By definition that only has two spatial dimensions.
And again, not here. Yet again, the surface is 2D.

Not only have you contradicted yourself this time, you have also been caught lying about it...
Nope, You have just once again shown everyone how dishonest you are.
You have been unable to provide a single instance of where I claimed a line was 2D.

Not all information is relevant to every discussion.
Altitude is irrelevant when discussing flight???
Not when discussing the path the plane traces along the surface of Earth.

The purveyor of truth strikes again... Just disregard any information that proves you wrong
No, discard the information that is not relevant.

Your delusions of grandeur don't change the fact you have been proven wrong and a liar... You would think your ass has handles as many times as I handed it to you haha!
Projecting again I see.
You are the one that has repeatedly been shown to be a liar and repeatedly gotten your ass handed to you.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flying to the Moon
« Reply #82 on: December 22, 2017, 02:02:14 PM »
<< Irrelevant ravings of Marvin the Moronic Martian expunged >>
How about debating actual issues, like Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy, instead of proving what obnoxious little Martian you are.

Are all Martians as bad as you are, or are you an escapee from the Martian Mental Menagerie?

If other Martians are anything like you, we'll have to get Trump to erect a huge wall between us and Mars.
Though Trump would probably rather nuke that little light in the sky that we call Mars, just to show those pesky North Koreans that he can do it.

So, Mr Marvin the Moronic Martian, just watch how you behave in future!