Revisiting a commonly presented image...

  • 436 Replies
  • 25008 Views
*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #360 on: February 16, 2018, 12:44:27 AM »
Here is Newton proving you wrong:
Newton can't prove anybody wrong. No theory is dependent on the words of any one person. Newton was also an alchemist.
And Tesla certainly believed that the earth was a rotating Globe,
Quote from: Nikola Tesla
NATURAL FORCES INFLUENCE US
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accepting all this as true let us consider some of the forces and influences which act on such a wonderfully complex automatic engine with organs inconceivably sensitive and delicate, as it is carried by the spinning terrestrial globe in lightning flight through space. For the sake of simplicity we may assume that the earth's axis is perpendicular to the ecliptic and that the human automaton is at the equator. Let his weight be one hundred and sixty pounds then, at the rotational velocity of about 1,520 feet per second with which he is whirled around, the mechanical energy stored in his body will be nearly 5,780,000 foot pounds, which is about the energy of a hundred-pound cannon ball.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The sun, having a mass 332,000 times that of the earth, but being 23,000 times farther, will attract the automaton with a force of about one-tenth of one pound, alternately increasing and diminishing his normal weight by that amount

Though not conscious of these periodic changes, he is surely affected by them.

The earth in its rotation around the sun carries him with the prodigious speed of nineteen miles per second . . . . .
But for some reason you disagree with Tesla - was  Nikola Tesla wrong about the shape and motions of the earth?

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #361 on: February 16, 2018, 12:56:37 AM »
It takes a single counterexample to invalidate a hypothesis.  A pressure on an object will add a force to the object. This force will depend on the objects area. The acceleration of the object will depend on this force and the mass of the object.. This is not see by objects in freefall.  Objects in freefall fall at the same rate regardless of mass or shape.
You really need to learn how to use the "Quote facility" so that you  ;D victim  ;D is identified.
Quote from: sandokhan
Your assertion has been debunked right here:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2026418#msg2026418
Rubbish, of course  "Objects in freefall fall at the same rate regardless of mass or shape".
Try dropping objects dense enough to be negligibly affected by air resistance.
Or dropping any objects in an extremely low pressure chamber.
Quote from: sandokhan
Which means you are trolling the upper forums as usual.
Incorrect, that would be your presenting arguments totally contrary to well accepted physical laws.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #362 on: February 16, 2018, 01:14:21 AM »
Lol check out the rabbibot claiming satellites sit on tables then calling himself an idiot for saying so:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2024656#msg2024656

The rabbibot just spams anything to keep wasting honest human beings time...
« Last Edit: February 16, 2018, 01:17:22 AM by Papa Legba »
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #363 on: February 16, 2018, 02:03:09 AM »
It takes a single counterexample to invalidate a hypothesis.
Here is Newton proving you wrong:
...

Newtonian gravity is no longer the accepted theory for gravitation. You need to advance a few years.
What is interesting is that Einstein's GR can be solved using the Schwarzschild metric[1] for the case of a small object (say a rocket, a satellite, an aircraft, a car, you, I or a ball) travelling at a velocity much less than "c" near the surface of a massive object (say the earth).

This solution then ends up with simply Newton's Laws of Motion and Gravitation, and includes even centripetal acceleration and the Coriolis effect.

Hence Newtonian solutions are perfectly acceptable for velocities up to at least c/1000 and even for masses well above the earth's mass, though this depends on the precision one needs for the answer.

Quote from: sandokhan
The gravitational potential energy equation for rockets is based totally on Newtonian gravity.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2026412#msg2026412
That's no problem! For all practical purposes GR and Newtonian Gravitation end up with the same result.

[1] See Wikipedia, Schwarzschild metric.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #364 on: February 16, 2018, 02:12:12 AM »
The rabbibot doesn't think gravity forces things downwards:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=72335.msg2017797#msg2017797

It loves wasting peoples time with waffle...
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #365 on: February 16, 2018, 02:17:03 AM »
Lol check out the rab claiming satellites sit on tables then calling himself an idiot for saying so:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2024656#msg2024656
If you think that post says anything about "claiming satellites sit on tables" you reading comprehension score is about -5 out of 10.

Just check out that post to see the Ignorant Deceptive Voodoo Priest again trying to deceive everybody, as it always does.

But what can we expect? Papa Legba is well known for being a trickster and deceiver.

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #366 on: February 16, 2018, 02:41:20 AM »
The rab doesn't think gravity forces things downwards:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=72335.msg2017797#msg2017797

Gravity does not force anything down! Look at this again.

Gravity not forcing Physics Book down.
         
Gravity not forcing Satellite in orbit down!

So gravity does not force things down but just applies a downward force to books on chairs and to satellites in orbit.

But an Ignorant Deceptive Voodoo Priest could not be expected to understand the difference.

So, run away and attend to the Voodoo Priestly rituals that you've been neglecting while trolling here.

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #367 on: February 16, 2018, 02:44:43 AM »
And gasses follow the path of least resistance from higher to lower pressure.
Why do gasses move from higher to lower pressure.
Hint: It has something to do with forces acting on the gas.
Extra Hint: If a force acts on the gas, what does newtons third law tell us?

Wtf?
Extra extra hint: For anything to move away from something containing it, it has to accelerate away.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #368 on: February 16, 2018, 02:46:31 AM »
Lol check out the rab claiming satellites sit on tables then calling himself an idiot for saying so:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2024656#msg2024656
If you think that post says anything about "claiming satellites sit on tables" you reading comprehension score is about -5 out of 10.

Just check out that post to see the Ignorant Deceptive Voodoo Priest again trying to deceive everybody, as it always does.

But what can we expect? Papa Legba is well known for being a trickster and deceiver!

The posts prove that you lie and contradict yourself about the most obvious and provable effects of gravitation.

Yet here you are, pontificating about its causes...

You are a timewasting AI algorithm.

And, as usual, you posted another reply whilst I was writing this one.

You did this to waste yet more of my time.

You also contradicted yourself again in it.

Case proven.

Oh, and another reply from empirical whilst I was writing this...

Funny how you know I am online and writing replies, is it not?

Something a bot would be perfect for.

Case proven again.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #369 on: February 16, 2018, 02:47:23 AM »
And gasses follow the path of least resistance from higher to lower pressure.
Why do gasses move from higher to lower pressure.
Hint: It has something to do with forces acting on the gas.
Extra Hint: If a force acts on the gas, what does newtons third law tell us?

Wtf?
Extra extra hint: For anything to move away from something containing it, it has to accelerate away.

Wtf?
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #370 on: February 16, 2018, 02:49:42 AM »
And gasses follow the path of least resistance from higher to lower pressure.
Why do gasses move from higher to lower pressure.
Hint: It has something to do with forces acting on the gas.
Extra Hint: If a force acts on the gas, what does newtons third law tell us?

Wtf?
Extra extra hint: For anything to move away from something containing it, it has to accelerate away.

Wtf?
If something is sitting stationery, then it moves away from something, clearly it has gained velocity.
I'm practically telling you the answer, come on.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #371 on: February 16, 2018, 03:06:01 AM »
And gasses follow the path of least resistance from higher to lower pressure.
Why do gasses move from higher to lower pressure.
Hint: It has something to do with forces acting on the gas.
Extra Hint: If a force acts on the gas, what does newtons third law tell us?

Wtf?
Extra extra hint: For anything to move away from something containing it, it has to accelerate away.

Wtf?
If something is sitting stationery, then it moves away from something, clearly it has gained velocity.
I'm practically telling you the answer, come on.

Wtf?

http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/FALL/thermodynamics/notes/node33.html
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #372 on: February 16, 2018, 04:41:53 AM »
Lol check out the rab claiming satellites sit on tables then calling himself an idiot for saying so:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2024656#msg2024656
If you think that post says anything about "claiming satellites sit on tables" you reading comprehension score is about -5 out of 10.

Just check out that post to see the Ignorant Deceptive Voodoo Priest again trying to deceive everybody, as it always does.

But what can we expect? Papa Legba is well known for being a trickster and deceiver!
The posts prove that you lie and contradict yourself about the most obvious and provable effects of gravitation.
Yet here you are, pontificating about its causes...
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
You are a timewasting AI algorithm.
And, as usual, you posted another reply whilst I was writing this one.
How was I supposed to know that the Idiotic Paranoic Delusional Voodoo Priest was writing a post?

Quote from: Papa Legba
You did this to waste yet more of my time.
You also contradicted yourself again in it.
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
Case proven.
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
Oh, and another reply from empirical whilst I was writing this...
Funny how you know I am online and writing replies, is it not?
Something a bot would be perfect for.
Case proven again.

I have no idea whether you are writing posts or practising your usual Voodoo Witchcraft. Though it's rather obvious now that you really are an Psychotic Paranoic Delusional Voodoo Priest.

A Psychiatrist would probably decide that his professional diagnosis was that you were "Stark Starin' Bonkers".

Should we pass the hat around to pay for some professional help to assist your recovery from this Paranoic Delusional Psychosis you now seem to be suffering from?

Just trying to help!

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #373 on: February 16, 2018, 08:44:08 AM »
Lol check out the rab claiming satellites sit on tables then calling himself an idiot for saying so:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=73925.msg2024656#msg2024656
If you think that post says anything about "claiming satellites sit on tables" you reading comprehension score is about -5 out of 10.

Just check out that post to see the Ignorant Deceptive Voodoo Priest again trying to deceive everybody, as it always does.

But what can we expect? Papa Legba is well known for being a trickster and deceiver!
The posts prove that you lie and contradict yourself about the most obvious and provable effects of gravitation.
Yet here you are, pontificating about its causes...
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
You are a timewasting AI algorithm.
And, as usual, you posted another reply whilst I was writing this one.
How was I supposed to know that the Idiotic Paranoic Delusional Voodoo Priest was writing a post?

Quote from: Papa Legba
You did this to waste yet more of my time.
You also contradicted yourself again in it.
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
Case proven.
Incorrect as usual!
Quote from: Papa Legba
Oh, and another reply from empirical whilst I was writing this...
Funny how you know I am online and writing replies, is it not?
Something a bot would be perfect for.
Case proven again.

I have no idea whether you are writing posts or practising your usual Voodoo Witchcraft. Though it's rather obvious now that you really are an Psychotic Paranoic Delusional Voodoo Priest.

A Psychiatrist would probably decide that his professional diagnosis was that you were "Stark Starin' Bonkers".

Should we pass the hat around to pay for some professional help to assist your recovery from this Paranoic Delusional Psychosis you now seem to be suffering from?

Just trying to help!

The usual time wasting waffle and personal abuse from an obvious AI algorithm that contradicts itself in the space of one post and does not know gravity forces things down.

This is all it is programmed to do.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #374 on: February 16, 2018, 11:54:54 AM »
The rocket and satellite equations of motion are much more complex than the thrust formula.
How about you deal with your earlier failures before moving on.

Do you accept you were wrong regarding the thrust equations?
If so, are you going to admit that?
If not, are you going to defend your claims?

Or better yet, quit with this off topic tangent (which is just you spamming now, leading the thread further off topic) and deal with the OP.

WHAT CAUSES THE CURVE??

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #375 on: February 16, 2018, 12:00:00 PM »
The usual time wasting waffle and personal abuse from an obvious AI algorithm that contradicts itself in the space of one post and does not know gravity forces things down.

This is all it is programmed to do.
Yes, that does seem to be all you are capable of doing.
Now how about you address my posts explaining why you are wrong (I see you completely ignored it this time, did you run out of excuses?), or better yet, tell us what causes the curve in the image in the OP?

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #376 on: February 16, 2018, 01:01:42 PM »
Now how about you address my posts explaining why you are wrong

How about you stop wasting my time asking me to repeat things I already did?

Oh, you will never do that, because you are a time wasting AI algorithm.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #377 on: February 16, 2018, 04:25:51 PM »
<< Off-topic ramblings of Puppet Legba deleted  >>
Now that we know you only do your flat-earth puppeteers' bidding, you've lost all your :P credibility ::)Mr Puppet Legba 

Poor Pathetic Papa controlled by FE strings.

PS You never had any ::P credibility  ::), so I guess it's no loss to  Mr Puppet Legba. You're a joke  Mr Legless Legba.
      And don't accuse me of ad hominem attacks or personal abuse, it's about all you do except for a little Voodoo fyzix.

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17214
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #378 on: February 16, 2018, 09:19:32 PM »
Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.

Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.


The vegetables have spoken.
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #379 on: February 16, 2018, 09:39:20 PM »
Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.

Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.


The vegetables have spoken.
I didn't realise that the lettuce and cucumber we so closely related, one would almost think they were con-joined twins, or just cons?

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17214
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #380 on: February 16, 2018, 10:19:04 PM »
Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.

Thanks for the good advice. New knowledge more. I have a lot of ideas.


The vegetables have spoken.
I didn't realise that the lettuce and cucumber we so closely related, one would almost think they were con-joined twins, or just cons?

One is technically a fruit, but, he needs to work that out on his own.
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

rvlvr

  • 1444
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #381 on: February 16, 2018, 10:25:35 PM »
Here is hoping moderators are on the job. Check the IP, too.

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 17214
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #382 on: February 16, 2018, 10:36:00 PM »
Hint: It's D1
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #383 on: February 17, 2018, 12:45:48 AM »
<< Off-topic ramblings of Puppet Legba deleted  >>
Now that we know you only do your flat-earth puppeteers' bidding, you've lost all your :P credibility ::)Mr Puppet Legba 

Poor Pathetic Papa controlled by FE strings.

PS You never had any ::P credibility  ::), so I guess it's no loss to  Mr Puppet Legba. You're a joke  Mr Legless Legba.
      And don't accuse me of ad hominem attacks or personal abuse, it's about all you do except for a little Voodoo fyzix.

I'm trying to imagine the kind of human being that would write such an insane post.

But I can't, hence my persuasion that you are an AI algorithm.

I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #384 on: February 17, 2018, 02:13:33 AM »
How about you stop wasting my time asking me to repeat things I already did?
I'm not.
I'm asking you to actually address what has been said rather than repeating the same refuted crap.

Since you seem to have no interest in discussing the prior tangent after you have been shown to be wrong beyond any sane doubt, perhaps you can address the image in the OP.
WHAT CAUSES THE CURVE??

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #385 on: February 17, 2018, 02:19:56 AM »
How about you stop wasting my time asking me to repeat things I already did?
I'm not.

You are.

It's all you are programmed to do.

Everyone knows this, botty boy.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #386 on: February 17, 2018, 02:27:44 AM »
You are.
No, I'm not.
You continually repeating the same pathetic crap instead of answering the question doesn't mean I am asking you to do so.

Now answer the question:
What causes the curve in the image in the OP?

If you can't, then get lost.

*

rabinoz

  • 22954
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #387 on: February 17, 2018, 02:34:20 AM »
I'm not.
You are.
The Idiot Voodoo Puppet on a String could save everybody's time by just not replying.
That would be make sense, something that seems totally lacking in the Idiot Voodoo Puppet on a String.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #388 on: February 17, 2018, 02:37:45 AM »
Incorrect.

Here is where I answered your mad AI question:

A rocket and its exhaust do not move as a single entity.

The mad AI algorithm lies blatantly.

The exhaust of a rocket is a force exerted by the rocket itself and moves with the rocket at all times.

The simplest of observations proves this.

Look:



No further communication is possible with the mad lying AI algorithm.

Since then you have gone mental, as you know you have no plausible response.

I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: Revisiting a commonly presented image...
« Reply #389 on: February 17, 2018, 02:40:06 AM »
Incorrect.

Here is where I answered your mad AI question:
No. That is where you avoided it yet again and provided more evidence that you are wrong.
The rockets are burning fuel, producing exhaust, yet the same amount "stays" with the rocket, indicating the rocket is continually ejecting that exhaust.

In order for you to provide a video showing me to be wrong, you need to show the rocket after it has burnt all its fuel, with all of its exhaust, still attached.
But you will never do that because it doesn't happen in reality.

Now as you are not interesting in any honest response to that and it is already in another thread, deal with the image in the OP.

WHAT CAUSES THE CURVE?