I am beside myself that you would say "it might by matter missing, even from another dimension." There is absolutely no physical evidence of extra dimensions at this point outside of pretty tenuous theoretical frameworks. It's a black box. "Magic happens here," if you will. To appeal to extra dimensions when no evidence is really on the table while deriding FEers for a similar transgression is an interesting tactic.
I'm so glad to be a source of
innocent merriment but I can't claim any credit. I'm no Cosmologist, I just look at the pretty pictures
.
Michio Kaku: What Is Dark Matter?Big Think | | The LHC, dark matter and extra dimensions.Pindex | | Could dark matter be coming from other dimensions?World Science U |
I don't disagree that all the facts aren't in, but you can't claim that territory only for RE and disallow it for FE.
There is a huge difference.
Whatever dark matter might be it is completely insignificant in our neighborhood of space.
And dark energy, whether it is necessary or not, has no effect on objects gravitationally bound and that includes all the galaxies in our super-group.
So these hypotheses are for regions of space that can only be observed very indirectly.
But the things claimed by the various FE hypotheses are for regions that can be comparatively easily observed and even visited, but they deny that.
So I see no double standard in using, as yet, unproven hypotheses to explain these observations from far far away - millions of light years in some cases while not accepting flat earthers denial of the
behaviour of gravitation.
Especially as this
behaviour of gravitation has been verified by many experiments on earth and astronomical measurements.
But flat-earthers simply deny all this and claim that all these experiments and the many more qualitative demonstrations are fakes.
I don't see many people arguing that the force we feel at the surface of the Earth is fake. Several people here argue about the underlying cause and characteristics, and I think that's to be expected at a place like FES.
It's fine to debate the underlying cause but to deny the measured characteristics without evidence seems quite disingenuous to me.
It's a feature, not a bug. And more often than not, it's the FE here that get derided, even by those who have enough knowledge to put aside their beliefs to say "What if?" and try to pursue the thought experiment.
Within our whole solar system even Newtonian Gravitation is accurate to a degree no flat earther seems able to measure.
And the minute variations near the sun are fit very with General Relativity.
But no flat earth "model" seems able to function if the Newtonian Laws are correct.
Few flat earthers, if any, accept that gravitation
behaves as if mass attracts mass as
.
The "infinite plane earth" is almost consistent with it except that it provides no feasible explanation for the the motion of sun, moon, planets and stars.
Then UA gives a reasonable simulation of a uniform gravitational field across the whole earth.
It tries, however, to explain the variations observed by postulating "celestial gravitation" but the justification of UA is Einstein's Equivalence Principle.
The Equivalence Principle states that inertial mass is identical to the gravitational mass but "celestial gravitation" would demand that "celestial objects" must be composed of a different type of matter.
But there is no evidence yet of any "different type of matter" (dark matter
).
On of the biggest problems I have with any flat earth "theory" is that all contrary evidence seems able to be claimed as "fabricated" making said flat earth "theory"
unfalsifiable.