Flat Earth Belief in Particles

I’m curious to know if Flat Earth Theorists believe in the science community’s exploration into micro-particles?

My flat is far too dusty not to believe in microparticles.

Did you really mean micro?  That's not very small.

Subatomic?

Atomic particles seem to have little relation with the flat Earth theory. We are generally neutral about it.

Atomic particles seem to have little relation with the flat Earth theory. We are generally neutral about it.

This is a good example of one of the many contradictions that is evident in flat earth thinking, the cherry picking of what science to believe and what science to reject, based on no more than belief in a flat earth.

When you dig down belief in a flat earth nesecitates the rejection of a very wide and diverse set of scientific principles, everyday natural phenomenon, and a huge range of technology. That is of course apart from all the occupations of millions of people on the planet.

While the sub atomic world appears to operate on different principles from that of the macro world, only based on our current understanding of course, a future theory of everything may well explain both. In that case it would put Flatinos in an even more precarious position, if that were possible, than they are today.

I’m curious to know if Flat Earth Theorists believe in the science community’s exploration into micro-particles?

Actually flat earth belief does conflict with some aspects of the subatomic world in that they reject nuclear fusion. They are compelled into doing this as they reject both the nature of the sun along with its known location and size. They believe in a small near sun powered by who knows what.
Strange but true.

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

I’m curious to know if Flat Earth Theorists believe in the science community’s exploration into micro-particles?

Wise is the eggspurt on non-existent particles. Have a look at:

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on August 09, 2016, 03:21:35 AM

A large object in the thermosphere would not be heated by the thermosphere because there are almost no hot particles in the thermosphere.    The astronauts would be frozen on one side and boiled on the other by the suns radiation so they would not make for very good eating necessarily.

In my opinion, the term of the "particles" are a scientic lie because we never see them. What is difference of the "particle" and God. We don't see both of them. But when we explain something with God you are saying about it a lie because you don't see the God. So i refuse the particle and claim you are saying lie because we don't see the particle anyway.

About particles i opened an issue here: "Particle is the God for Scientists instead of God" https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66533.0

With more particles or with less particles if the temperature show you 1.500 degrees celcius, almost everything have been cookes. If it is not, prove it! Dont' tell us a fable!

2)

You are ignored for Interrupting a conversation that i wrote it on my signature. You can find out why did i do that here: https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67361.0

Ok you are ignored from now on. But howbeit i have a rights reserved for an answer if your answer is very very important. If it's not that my guess like this, this is our last dialogue. So bye bye bye.

And he had this whole thread on these evil particles: Particle is the God for Scientists instead of God[./color]

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

But how do you achieve fusion in a small sun?

This is normally explained by gravity and a big sun.

Maybe fusion is not the energy source the sun relies on. The sun is special matter that has a lot of energy reserve, and can be released slowly. The matter in question has not been discovered yet.

Quote from: Spanky on January 22, 2019, 10:37:59 PM

Atomic particles seem to have little relation with the flat Earth theory. We are generally neutral about it.

This is a good example of one of the many contradictions that is evident in flat earth thinking, the cherry picking of what science to believe and what science to reject, based on no more than belief in a flat earth.

When you dig down belief in a flat earth nesecitates the rejection of a very wide and diverse set of scientific principles, everyday natural phenomenon, and a huge range of technology. That is of course apart from all the occupations of millions of people on the planet.

While the sub atomic world appears to operate on different principles from that of the macro world, only based on our current understanding of course, a future theory of everything may well explain both. In that case it would put Flatinos in an even more precarious position, if that were possible, than they are today.

This is a good example of someone who has been here long enough to know better taking the post of a noob and shitposter seriously.

Quote from: Spanky on January 22, 2019, 10:37:59 PM

Atomic particles seem to have little relation with the flat Earth theory. We are generally neutral about it.

This is a good example of one of the many contradictions that is evident in flat earth thinking, the cherry picking of what science to believe and what science to reject, based on no more than belief in a flat earth.

When you dig down belief in a flat earth nesecitates the rejection of a very wide and diverse set of scientific principles, everyday natural phenomenon, and a huge range of technology. That is of course apart from all the occupations of millions of people on the planet.

While the sub atomic world appears to operate on different principles from that of the macro world, only based on our current understanding of course, a future theory of everything may well explain both. In that case it would put Flatinos in an even more precarious position, if that were possible, than they are today.

Ahhh the multiverse and string theory....the glue between two worlds....
That means there is an infinite numbers of universes according to many scientists...and you do not cherry pick....no you won't dare to do such thing....!!

Positive thing... there must be a universe with a ''lonegranger'' with a more likable character ....could it really be true ....could it ?

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

What you say is simply not possible. A small sun 32 miles in diameter is simply not large enough for the fission process to start.....go do the maths. A ball of hydrogen, helium and a few other bits and bobs 32 miles in diameter! You must Be joking!
This is the whole point of my post...small sun = no fission, unless you want to reject our knowledge of subatomic particles. You can’t have it both ways.

Maybe fusion is not the energy source the sun relies on. The sun is special matter that has a lot of energy reserve, and can be released slowly. The matter in question has not been discovered yet.

This is the whole point of this thread! For a tiny tiny sun, there is nothing in physics that would explain its workings given what we know about its composition from studying the light it emits.

For your tiny sun you need to dream up a whole lot of flatino bull.

Quote from: Spanky on January 23, 2019, 01:14:25 AM

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

What you say is simply not possible. A small sun 32 miles in diameter is simply not large enough for the fission process to start.....go do the maths. A ball of hydrogen, helium and a few other bits and bobs 32 miles in diameter! You must Be joking!
This is the whole point of my post...small sun = no fission, unless you want to reject our knowledge of subatomic particles. You can’t have it both ways.

The sun isn't really doing a whole lot of fissioning of hydrogen though. Ever tried splitting an atom with only one proton? It's unbelievably hard to do. Impossibly difficult, some might say.

The sun isn't really doing a whole lot of fissioning of hydrogen though. Ever tried splitting an atom with only one proton? It's unbelievably hard to do. Impossibly difficult, some might say.

Oh, I don't know, you might end up with
With a quark quark here
And a quark-quark there
Here a quark, there a quark
Everywhere a quark quark
Old MacDonald had a farm
E-I-E-I-O
But as the energy production on the sun, I think we might rule fission out - maybe Lonegranger was just fission for bites.

Quote from: Lonegranger on January 23, 2019, 02:03:59 PM

Quote from: Spanky on January 23, 2019, 01:14:25 AM

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

What you say is simply not possible. A small sun 32 miles in diameter is simply not large enough for the fission process to start.....go do the maths. A ball of hydrogen, helium and a few other bits and bobs 32 miles in diameter! You must Be joking!
This is the whole point of my post...small sun = no fission, unless you want to reject our knowledge of subatomic particles. You can’t have it both ways.

The sun isn't really doing a whole lot of fissioning of hydrogen though. Ever tried splitting an atom with only one proton? It's unbelievably hard to do. Impossibly difficult, some might say.

No, you don't understand.  It's the helium and other bits that are being fissioned into hydrogen.  Duh!

Quote from: Lonegranger on January 23, 2019, 02:03:59 PM

Quote from: Spanky on January 23, 2019, 01:14:25 AM

There is no known contadiction or support of subatomic particles regarding the flat Earth theory. However, as you mentioned about the sun, I am supportive that the sun is small, but close. In such case, the energy received by the Earth is still the same. Whether nuclear fusion occur in the sun or not does not prove or disprove the sun is near and small. Regarding the fact that you would say that a small sun carrying out fusion would soon blow up and explode, and would not dissipate energy slowly  there may be mechanisms that allow slow release of energy. In fact, such mechanism is under investigation by many scientists, as hydrogen is very abundant, and being able to release energy from fusion slowly means the end of energy crisis.

What you say is simply not possible. A small sun 32 miles in diameter is simply not large enough for the fission process to start.....go do the maths. A ball of hydrogen, helium and a few other bits and bobs 32 miles in diameter! You must Be joking!
This is the whole point of my post...small sun = no fission, unless you want to reject our knowledge of subatomic particles. You can’t have it both ways.

The sun isn't really doing a whole lot of fissioning of hydrogen though. Ever tried splitting an atom with only one proton? It's unbelievably hard to do. Impossibly difficult, some might say.

And what facts lead you to believe in that? How did you come by your knowledge of fission? How do you know how many protons hydrogen has, or even if such a thing exists? And how do you know personally what the sun is composed off? Your comment is just another example of flat earth piggy backing on science. You read some thing that contradicts with your views which you then claim is false, not through any careful experimentation, rather you reject it because it conflicts with your blind belief.

If you were neutral on this subject and had the choice to believe either ; every astronomer and solar scientists on the planet on the one hand or, a bunch of flat earth moderators.

As if often the case what is enabling you to make your claim that;
The sun isn't really doing a whole lot of fissioning of hydrogen though.....

Please provide some flat earth derived science.

Don't shift this over to me. You are the one who was wrong. You attacked Spanky for not understanding something that you also clearly don't understand. Take responsibility for your own arguments.

 Even though he may have attacked me for something he didnt know, you did argued against his view. You claim that fission is unlikely everywhere so the sun may be using energy other than fission or fusion to produce heat to show that his point regarding the small sun cannot carry out fission does not show that the sun part of the theory is flawed. He said that the sun is too small to carry out fission to show that flat Earthers cannot be neutral on subatomic particles. So you actually stood on the side that the sun may not be carrying out fission and that whether subatomic particles exist do not affect the flat earth theory.
And by the way, what is your view on subatomic particles anyway?

Don't shift this over to me. You are the one who was wrong. You attacked Spanky for not understanding something that you also clearly don't understand. Take responsibility for your own arguments.

Not attack....a different point of view, they are allowed? are you unable to discern the difference?
But back to you original comment, where did you obtain your knowledge of sub atomic physics?
This is the topic of the thread. Did you go to a university teaching a flat earth curriculum, if so which one?

Quote from: boydster on January 24, 2019, 04:08:31 AM

Don't shift this over to me. You are the one who was wrong. You attacked Spanky for not understanding something that you also clearly don't understand. Take responsibility for your own arguments.

Not attack....a different point of view, they are allowed? are you unable to discern the difference?
But back to you original comment, where did you obtain your knowledge of sub atomic physics?
This is the topic of the thread. Did you go to a university teaching a flat earth curriculum, if so which one?

I believe Boydster was just taking the piss because you seem to have gotten your nuclear reactions arse about tit.

I'm afraid he's right, the word you wanted was fusion.

Although your basic point still stands.  The sun's power is explained by regular physics, which mostly fits together nicer, but is another thing on a long list of things that can't be explained by Flat Earth.

Even though he may have attacked me for something he didnt know, you did argued against his view. You claim that fission is unlikely everywhere so the sun may be using energy other than fission or fusion to produce heat to show that his point regarding the small sun cannot carry out fission does not show that the sun part of the theory is flawed. He said that the sun is too small to carry out fission to show that flat Earthers cannot be neutral on subatomic particles. So you actually stood on the side that the sun may not be carrying out fission and that whether subatomic particles exist do not affect the flat earth theory.
And by the way, what is your view on subatomic particles anyway?

Show to me the attack? I was simply pointing out the error in your reasoning! If you think thats an attack perhaps you need to go read about what a debate is.

Quote from: Lonegranger on January 23, 2019, 12:40:20 AM

Quote from: Spanky on January 22, 2019, 10:37:59 PM

Atomic particles seem to have little relation with the flat Earth theory. We are generally neutral about it.

This is a good example of one of the many contradictions that is evident in flat earth thinking, the cherry picking of what science to believe and what science to reject, based on no more than belief in a flat earth.

When you dig down belief in a flat earth nesecitates the rejection of a very wide and diverse set of scientific principles, everyday natural phenomenon, and a huge range of technology. That is of course apart from all the occupations of millions of people on the planet.

While the sub atomic world appears to operate on different principles from that of the macro world, only based on our current understanding of course, a future theory of everything may well explain both. In that case it would put Flatinos in an even more precarious position, if that were possible, than they are today.

Ahhh the multiverse and string theory....the glue between two worlds....
That means there is an infinite numbers of universes according to many scientists...and you do not cherry pick....no you won't dare to do such thing....!!

Positive thing... there must be a universe with a ''lonegranger'' with a more likable character ....could it really be true ....could it ?

erm.....this topic is on sub atomic theory and how its at odds with flat earth thinking. The point is a small sun however you want to swing it is at odds with flat earth thinking. Rather than trying to address this even the mods try to derail the discussion.

Flatinos believe in a small sun. For nuclear fusion to take place converting hydrogen into helium and releasing energy takes massive pressure and temperatures that could never be produced in a small 32 mile diameter sun according to sub atomic theory. Flatinos also reject E=MC^2 which explains where the energy comes from, and the mass to energy conversion that takes place during the fusion process.

From their small sun belief it follows that they do not agree with the pillars of sub atomic physics, and have failed to explain what powers their small sun and how it has lasted 4.5bn years

The other main problem that flatinos run and hide from and are at loss to explain regardless of how often they are asked is; where do they get their information from on the sub atomic world? is there a flatino subatomic research facility somewhere? or do they just piggy back of conventional science, rejecting the bits they dont like if it impacts on their beliefs.

Belief in a small sun therefore contradicts sub atomic theory.

17 November claims elements don’t exist. Asking him what makes gold different from silver, if you want a laugh.

erm.....this topic is on sub atomic theory and how its at odds with flat earth thinking. The point is a small sun however you want to swing it is at odds with flat earth thinking. Rather than trying to address this even the mods try to derail the discussion.

Really? The OP by a hit-and-run poster asked about micro-particles. The derailment of the original topic (neither of which the OP author seems to care about in the slightest) then proceeded as usual.

Quote from: Lonegranger on January 25, 2019, 08:12:53 AM

erm.....this topic is on sub atomic theory and how its at odds with flat earth thinking. The point is a small sun however you want to swing it is at odds with flat earth thinking. Rather than trying to address this even the mods try to derail the discussion.

Really? The OP by a hit-and-run poster asked about micro-particles. The derailment of the original topic (neither of which the OP author seems to care about in the slightest) then proceeded as usual.

I think it was taken that he was referring to sub-atomic.

So are we in agreement that the discussion about fission powering the energy released by the sun is a silly conversation to be having?

No one has actually been to the sun. No one has taken sample from the sun showing that the sun is a hydrogen bomb. Scientists are just guessing from what they observe the sun to be. The sun may not be a hydrogen bomb. It can be some sort of unknown materials. Its just that the scientist spexulates what the sun is, and the speculation is taught by schools, so you accepted it. Just because the sun is not a hydrogen bomb does not prove or disprove the existence of subatomic particles, even though they are somewhat related.

No one has actually been to the sun. No one has taken sample from the sun showing that the sun is a hydrogen bomb. Scientists are just guessing from what they observe the sun to be. The sun may not be a hydrogen bomb. It can be some sort of unknown materials. Its just that the scientist spexulates what the sun is, and the speculation is taught by schools, so you accepted it. Just because the sun is not a hydrogen bomb does not prove or disprove the existence of subatomic particles, even though they are somewhat related.

No guessing involved, it’s called science.

What do you think about the sun? In fact what do you think about anything? This rejection of science and education is just another flatino tactic to cover up their woeful ignorance about the world.

If you want to know about the sun and how it works and how we came to discover it, go look it up. If all people were like you we would still be in the Stone Age, banging rocks together.

Maybe fusion is not the energy source the sun relies on. The sun is special matter that has a lot of energy reserve, and can be released slowly. The matter in question has not been discovered yet.

The composition of the sun can quite easily be determined by measuring the spectra of sunlight. If you refute that, you refute all of particle physics. If you don't, well then you have to admit to a big sun far away. There is no middle ground.