The earth is round - earthquakes and the p waves they cause

Whenever an earthquake occurs, it creates two types of waves: S waves and P waves. S waves are the waves that travel on the surface, and P waves are the waves that travel through the earth.

I'll state that again: P waves are the waves that travel through the earth.

P waves are always measurable on the other side of the planet. A good example of this is during the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. The P waves centered straight to an area near Ecuador.

It is a fact that whenever there is an earthquake, the P waves can be measured on the other side of the world within half an hour.

In fact, P waves are not able to travel through the core of the planet, creating a "shadow." Using P waves that have been shadowed is actually what has given scientists most of our knowledge about the earth's core; proof that there is something at the center of the earth.

Silly bunch of people on this site, everybody knows that the earth is round and hollow.

That's all well and good, and if I had a network of seismic wave detectors situated around the globe, I could prove the earth were round by this argument. However, assuming I do not, I fail to see how this evidence is any better than the photos from space taken by NASA.

You don't even need seismic wave detectors. When a large earthquake happens, and somewhere else on the other side of the earth is reporting to feel the p waves generated, call some random people up in that country or something. If they said they felt some shaking, BAM!, you have it.

Government workers aren't the only people who can feel the earth shaking.

You don't even need seismic wave detectors. When a large earthquake happens, and somewhere else on the other side of the earth is reporting to feel the p waves generated, call some random people up in that country or something. If they said they felt some shaking, BAM!, you have it.

Government workers aren't the only people who can feel the earth shaking.

Please. The only way P waves provide evidence of the shape of the earth is by knowing the exact timing. After all, waves can propagate on any shape, so to actually determine the geometry of the shape in question you need an accurate metric, and wave propagation is only a good metric if you can time how long it takes to propagate.

You mean the fact that the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake was felt in Ecuador does not mean the earth is round? It doesn't even at least throw a monkey wrench in the flat earth theory?

that earthquake also shortend the day (sped up earth rotation) by several miliseconds!!!!!!!!!!! :shock:

You mean the fact that the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake was felt in Ecuador does not mean the earth is round? It doesn't even at least throw a monkey wrench in the flat earth theory?

Not really. Seismic waves could travel perfectly well on a disk, and reflections off of the edges of the disk could cause them to interfere with each other, causing them to be felt in some areas but not others. Nothing about an earthquake in the Indian Ocean being felt in Ecuador precludes a flat Earth, or even messes with the theory. These seismic waves could also trigger earthquakes of their own, which would also explain why the shaking would be felt in some places but not others.

Also, when you say "felt" do you mean that citizens of Ecuador could actually feel the earth shake, or that seismographs in Ecuador could detect the waves? If the former, what is your source of this information?

Whatever, everybody knows that these so called P waves get to other places through the tunnels underneath the flat earth.

Stop all of your rediculous Round Earth conspiracy posts and accept the Flat Earth facts.

Jesus Christ, what the hell is it going to take for you morons to accept what your own eyes tell you? When you look at the ground does it not look flat?

That should be all the proof you need.

if the earth was, infact round, if you look at the ground, it too, would look  flat.

we should send all the flat earth people into space to look at the earth.

A rather astounding speculation, Sodapop. If you peer upon the surface of a massive sphere that you are standing on, it would indeed look very flat, because of the distance of the curvature.

That's all well and good, and if I had a network of seismic wave detectors situated around the globe, I could prove the earth were round by this argument. However, assuming I do not, I fail to see how this evidence is any better than the photos from space taken by NASA.

Your ability to personally measure P waves has nothing to do with wether the statment is correct or not.

Your ability to personally measure P waves has nothing to do with wether the statment is correct or not.

Quite right, and I never said it did. It does, however, have everything to do with whether it constitutes useful evidence of the shape of the Earth. It does not, unless you have access to a global network of seismographs.

A rather astounding speculation, Sodapop. If you peer upon the surface of a massive sphere that you are standing on, it would indeed look very flat, because of the distance of the curvature.

And if God created billions of completely different species that all happen to look as though they were closely related and wiped the vast majority of them out, the fossil record would look just as if all these billions of species were not different species at all, but close relatives that evolved into each other. However, the fossil record implies that evolution occurred, and not that God undertook such a ludicrously arbitrary Creation; and likewise, the fact that Earth appears flat implies that it actually is flat, not that it is round. Sure, RE can account for the Earth appearing flat, but it isn't an immediate consequence of that.

So how would we survive on a Flat Earth? The rotation of our Round Earth is what gives us our gravity no? Surely a Flat Earth would have no gravity, or indeed an atmosphere? I fail to see how FE works

Quote from: "Mr. Smammi"

A rather astounding speculation, Sodapop. If you peer upon the surface of a massive sphere that you are standing on, it would indeed look very flat, because of the distance of the curvature.

And if God created billions of completely different species that all happen to look as though they were closely related and wiped the vast majority of them out, the fossil record would look just as if all these billions of species were not different species at all, but close relatives that evolved into each other. However, the fossil record implies that evolution occurred, and not that God undertook such a ludicrously arbitrary Creation; and likewise, the fact that Earth appears flat implies that it actually is flat, not that it is round. Sure, RE can account for the Earth appearing flat, but it isn't an immediate consequence of that.

First of all, I don't believe in "God". Not completely, anyways. I'm agnostic.

Secondly, I have something to tell you. Grass, my friend, is jaggedy. And by that, I mean, a field of grass. Let's say this field, however, is covered in short grass. Why, from a very far distance away, it looks like a big, green, hardwood floor. Doesn't it? Why, it often looks completely smooth from a distance. Well, this is considering that it's a well-watered field. So, does that mean I should assume that it's just a big, flat, green platform before actually investigating it? Well, maybe, but I sure as hell wouldn't come to any distinct conclusion about what it actually was, being this my first time seeing grass. So, then, wouldn't you say that perhaps you should go into space yourself before you make the kind of jugement that you are making?

So how would we survive on a Flat Earth? The rotation of our Round Earth is what gives us our gravity no?

No.

I fail to see how FE works

You don't even know how the RE works.  

Surely a Flat Earth would have no gravity

Correct.  It has acceleration.

It shows us how stupid this site is. Still peoples from ancient ages at 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

Believe it's Flat.

IT'S A ROUND!

The Earth is round. You want proof? I don't need any, you certainly don't have any. This site is a conspiracy in itself. Can you not see this? The government created this to show how idiotic some members of society can be. They've done this because they wanted money. It's clear surely, or are you all too blind to see you've been had?

The moon is round. Elvis told me so.

Correct. It has acceleration.

Acceleration doesn't exist. The theory of F=ma (Newton's 2nd law of motion) is surely untrue, as he was the first person to come up with the idea of gravity.

Also, when you say "felt" do you mean that citizens of Ecuador could actually feel the earth shake, or that seismographs in Ecuador could detect the waves? If the former, what is your source of this information?

Asking for a source is bloody rich coming from this site. "This is a conspiracy. FACT".

Just because you put it in capital letters doesn't make it fact.

T

Quote

Correct. It has acceleration.

Acceleration doesn't exist. The theory of F=ma (Newton's 2nd law of motion) is surely untrue, as he was the first person to come up with the idea of gravity.

So what is it exactly that's happening when I apply an unbalanced force to an object?

Quote from: "Crane"

T

Quote

Correct. It has acceleration.

Acceleration doesn't exist. The theory of F=ma (Newton's 2nd law of motion) is surely untrue, as he was the first person to come up with the idea of gravity.

So what is it exactly that's happening when I apply an unbalanced force to an object?

I was being ironic.

I was being ironic.

Is that what it was?

Quote from: "phaseshifter"

Your ability to personally measure P waves has nothing to do with wether the statment is correct or not.

Quite right, and I never said it did. It does, however, have everything to do with whether it constitutes useful evidence of the shape of the Earth. It does not, unless you have access to a global network of seismographs.

It does unless you assume that every person in the world involved seismology is lying to you while somehow all getting the same results and measurements.

Whenever an earthquake occurs, it creates two types of waves: S waves and P waves. S waves are the waves that travel on the surface, and P waves are the waves that travel through the earth.

I'll state that again: P waves are the waves that travel through the earth..

To get this thread back on topic, BOTH P and S waves travel trough the Earths core, but S waves can only travel through a solid, and are refracted by the molten outer core, and they create a shadow zone at 103degrees.

P waves are refracted and do not appear between 103 and 142 degrees, because at a liquid they slow down because they travel slower in a region of high compressability

Oh its L waves that Travel the surface

Oh and hit me with magnetism???

Quote from: "skeptical scientist"

Quote from: "phaseshifter"

Your ability to personally measure P waves has nothing to do with wether the statment is correct or not.

Quite right, and I never said it did. It does, however, have everything to do with whether it constitutes useful evidence of the shape of the Earth. It does not, unless you have access to a global network of seismographs.

It does unless you assume that every person in the world involved seismology is lying to you while somehow all getting the same results and measurements.

I thought we were on the Flat Earth Society Forums, where global conspiracy theories are the norm, and so any evidence which assumes there is no conspiracy is worthless.

[quote="sd0" When you look at the ground does it not look flat?[/quote]

mountains don't look that flat to me.

Arguing specific points is worthless.  Any and all discrepancies can be explained by use of The Conspiracy.  It matters not how many valid points you can raise if they have their all powerful shield to hold against us.

Yes, P waves would be perfect evidence.  However, The Conspiracy, obviously, is faking all of that info, so it is moot.  See?

Rather than raising specific points against these people, which only expands their dogma as they create new rationalizations, we should attack the basic fallacy which holds up all other points within their system, the Conspiracy.

I see the waves through a disc as well as a sphere, but then explain the 'Shadow Zone' where no S waves are detected, but P waves still are?

oh, and here is your thread necromancy, Bog

I see the waves through a disc as well as a sphere, but then explain the 'Shadow Zone' where no S waves are detected, but P waves still are?

oh, and here is your thread necromancy, Bog

K.

correction: no waves are encountered in the shadow zone, only P waves are encountered on the other side of it.