jobs that would be different (or not exist at all) if the earth was flat

  • 58 Replies
  • 8593 Views
?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: jobs that would be different (or not exist at all) if the earth was
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2019, 01:22:24 PM »
Lower frequency signals can travel much further than the curve of the earth should allow. AM radio and HAM radio can even propagate for thousands of miles. Over the Horizon Radar also travels much further than the horizon should allow, because they are likewise lower frequency signals.

Higher frequency signals, such as FM, have a shorter range because they degrade faster to the atmosphere.

Rubbish.  Longwave radio has carrier wavelengths over 1000m allowing it to diffract around the Earth’s curvature.  One type of over the horizon radar also uses low frequency ground waves, others reflect off the ionosphere.  Standard radar is line of sight and limited by the hilariously obvious thing you don’t accept.

Perfect example of basic physics you have to deny and make stuff up for.   So thanks for that.

Insulting is reported. Stop to provocate believers. Get write in respect. Term "Rubbish" isn't an argument. You've used it seperetaly it means you've used it as an insult.

And he says true. We are taking radio signals in frequencies of FM, AM, HAM and others from Russia that impossible in a round place since 1950's.

Mr. Wise
This is not intended a personal insult to you, but most of the world regards the idea of a flat Earth as pure rubbish....or worse ! LOL
Especially those of us who work in the real world on a day-to-day routine.
Or those of us who have ham radio as a hobby.

Mr. Googleotomy,

Be sure we think globularist theories are rubbish too. But we do not type "rubbish" when we see a globularist rubbish around. This is relevant with civilization level of flat earth knowers.

We have firstly knew the globularist theories. We have enough knowledge about it. And after that we learned the flat earth theory. We compared the two and threw the less likely possible one into the trash. We decided it was trash.

To achieve this, we had the prejudices like all globalists. however, we went beyond our prejudices and came to this conclusion as a result of objective observations.

Nevertheless, we do not call the globularist ideas "trash". Not because we do not think so, but because we respect our interlocutors. We expect same respect from our interlocutors. Is it really a hard thing?
May I ask what kind of work you do and what kind of an education do you have ?
What hobbies do you have ?
Let's face it. The earth is a globe.
Show us an accurate flat Earth map of the entire earth.
If you want to believe the earth is shaped like a flat disc, that's your problem.

Just another thought .
Have you ever been to sea and watched how ships and land come from and pass over the horizon ?
Have you ever wondered why you can't see forever if the earth was flat ?

I guess these things show you don't know anything about me. you can simply use the in-site search option.

Just answer the last two questions in my post.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 01:24:11 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
And he says true. We are taking radio signals in frequencies of FM, AM, HAM and others from Russia that impossible in a round place since 1950's.
No, what he says is pure fiction. He seems to like running in and spouting a bunch of fiction before running away.

There is nothing impossible about radar or radio on a RE.

If you think there is, provide just what it is with evidence backing it up.

Meanwhile there is plenty that is impossible for a FE (or which should be possible on a FE but are impossible in reality).
For example, as already addressed, plenty of radar systems are limited by the horizon. If an object is below the horizon, then Earth gets in the way and prevents the radar from seeing it. And we know it isn't any "limited visibility through the atmosphere" BS as objects above the horizon, even when beyond the horizon, are still detectable, and the air doesn't change that much with that little height.

But we do not type "rubbish" when we see a globularist rubbish around. This is relevant with civilization level of flat earth knowers.
No, you repeatedly dismiss arguments as rubbish or the like, and even directly insult plenty of REers.
It isn't really an indicator of your civility as much as it is indicative of your ability to defend a FE.

You are unable to show any problems with a RE, and unable to rationally defend a FE from the multitude of problems it has.

And yes, respecting you is quite hard when you repeatedly insult us and refuse to engage in rational debate while repeatedly spouting nonsense.

I guess these things show you don't know anything about me. you can simply use the in-site search option.
And doing so will just support his claims. He will even be able to find your broken map which is easily shown to be quite inaccurate, where your only defence is to reject the evidence which shows it is wrong.

That's a statement, not evidence or proof
You were the one making the claim that radar can see further than the curve of Earth allows. You are the one that has only provided empty statements, not evidence nor proof.
Do you have any evidence or proof of your claim that radar systems can see further than the curve of Earth allows; evidence which respects the properties of light such as reflection and diffraction?
Or do you just have empty statements?

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25673
  • Soul Transformer
Lower frequency signals can travel much further than the curve of the earth should allow. AM radio and HAM radio can even propagate for thousands of miles. Over the Horizon Radar also travels much further than the horizon should allow, because they are likewise lower frequency signals.

Higher frequency signals, such as FM, have a shorter range because they degrade faster to the atmosphere.

Rubbish.  Longwave radio has carrier wavelengths over 1000m allowing it to diffract around the Earth’s curvature.  One type of over the horizon radar also uses low frequency ground waves, others reflect off the ionosphere.  Standard radar is line of sight and limited by the hilariously obvious thing you don’t accept.

Perfect example of basic physics you have to deny and make stuff up for.   So thanks for that.

Insulting is reported. Stop to provocate believers. Get write in respect. Term "Rubbish" isn't an argument. You've used it seperetaly it means you've used it as an insult.

And he says true. We are taking radio signals in frequencies of FM, AM, HAM and others from Russia that impossible in a round place since 1950's.

Mr. Wise
This is not intended a personal insult to you, but most of the world regards the idea of a flat Earth as pure rubbish....or worse ! LOL
Especially those of us who work in the real world on a day-to-day routine.
Or those of us who have ham radio as a hobby.

Mr. Googleotomy,

Be sure we think globularist theories are rubbish too. But we do not type "rubbish" when we see a globularist rubbish around. This is relevant with civilization level of flat earth knowers.

We have firstly knew the globularist theories. We have enough knowledge about it. And after that we learned the flat earth theory. We compared the two and threw the less likely possible one into the trash. We decided it was trash.

To achieve this, we had the prejudices like all globalists. however, we went beyond our prejudices and came to this conclusion as a result of objective observations.

Nevertheless, we do not call the globularist ideas "trash". Not because we do not think so, but because we respect our interlocutors. We expect same respect from our interlocutors. Is it really a hard thing?
May I ask what kind of work you do and what kind of an education do you have ?
What hobbies do you have ?
Let's face it. The earth is a globe.
Show us an accurate flat Earth map of the entire earth.
If you want to believe the earth is shaped like a flat disc, that's your problem.

Just another thought .
Have you ever been to sea and watched how ships and land come from and pass over the horizon ?
Have you ever wondered why you can't see forever if the earth was flat ?

I guess these things show you don't know anything about me. you can simply use the in-site search option.

Just answer the last two questions in my post.

Read my theories about impossible geometric problems. This is a simple behaviour. I'll say yes I do, then you'll say me being a liar. I have many workings about them and published them. I've suggested you read my workings but you are talking me like I am a teenager yet awared the flat earth reality and globe earth fraud.

Since jackblack who is ignore list and here for manipulate the issue has posted anything, I'll reply your next reply via PM, for avoid his manipulation.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 02:59:34 PM by wise »
1+2+3+...+∞= 1

Come on bro, just admit that the the earth isn't a sphere, you won't even be wrong

İgnored: Disputeone

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
I have many workings about them and published them.
No, you have many non-workings, which you have got in the protected section to protect it from criticism. Every time I have seen them brought to the debate section they have been torn to shreds.

I'll reply your next reply via PM, for avoid his manipulation.
You mean to repeatedly preach rather than attempt a rational discussion.

I take it that means you don't have anything to back up your claims of magical russian radio disproving the globe?

the entire airline industry is based on a globe earth.   Routes are planned on a Globe earth, distances and times are calculated based on a globe earth of diameter ~8000 miles and circumference ~25000 miles.   Fuel loads for the flights are based on globe earth.  This is not just 1 job, this is an entire industry, hundreds of thousands of jobs around the world.   If the earth were truly flat, the entire airline industry would have to be in on the deception. 

*

Macarios

  • 2093
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

Lower frequency signals can travel much further than the curve of the earth should allow. AM radio and HAM radio can even propagate for thousands of miles. Over the Horizon Radar also travels much further than the horizon should allow, because they are likewise lower frequency signals.

Higher frequency signals, such as FM, have a shorter range because they degrade faster to the atmosphere.

Rubbish.  Longwave radio has carrier wavelengths over 1000m allowing it to diffract around the Earth’s curvature.

That's a statement, not evidence or proof

As was yours.

My statement, brief and incomplete though it was, is what standard physics says about radio wave propagation at different frequencies.

This is something I thought everyone learnt at school, but if you didn’t it’s easily found on the internet.  eg

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/ground-wave/basics-tutorial.php

Standard physics are of course what the engineers who design radio and radar systems use.

If you really did “do your own research”, you should already know all this.

Even if you think you can dispute standard physics with your fake “common knowledge”, given without reference or evidence, you are STILL wrong.  The curve of the earth is the reason given for low frequency waves propagating further, so obviously they aren’t going further than “should” be allowed under normal models.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
the entire airline industry is based on a globe earth.   Routes are planned on a Globe earth, distances and times are calculated based on a globe earth of diameter ~8000 miles and circumference ~25000 miles.   Fuel loads for the flights are based on globe earth.  This is not just 1 job, this is an entire industry, hundreds of thousands of jobs around the world.   If the earth were truly flat, the entire airline industry would have to be in on the deception.
Also any thing connected with oceanic travel for the same reasons... shipping, passenger service, cruise lines ,etc.
And all the navies in the world, of course ! Especially the lookouts in the crows nests. LOL
« Last Edit: May 26, 2019, 08:56:12 AM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
Even if you think you can dispute standard physics with your fake “common knowledge”, given without reference or evidence, you are STILL wrong.  The curve of the earth is the reason given for low frequency waves propagating further, so obviously they aren’t going further than “should” be allowed under normal models.

The curve of the earth is the reason that radio beams jump over the curve? Interesting description. But, unfortunatey, it is just another statement without physical evidence.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2019, 11:09:56 AM by Tom Bishop »

Even if you think you can dispute standard physics with your fake “common knowledge”, given without reference or evidence, you are STILL wrong.  The curve of the earth is the reason given for low frequency waves propagating further, so obviously they aren’t going further than “should” be allowed under normal models.

The curve of the earth is the reason that radio beams jump over the curve? Interesting description. But, unfortunatey, it just another statement without physical evidence.
Do a bit of looking for information.  Any progress with a map?

Even if you think you can dispute standard physics with your fake “common knowledge”, given without reference or evidence, you are STILL wrong.  The curve of the earth is the reason given for low frequency waves propagating further, so obviously they aren’t going further than “should” be allowed under normal models.

The curve of the earth is the reason that radio beams jump over the curve? Interesting description. But, unfortunatey, it is just another statement without physical evidence.

Not “jump”.  Diffract.  It’s a very normal thing that waves do.

You did go to school, right?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

It wouldn’t be quite so funny, if you weren’t simultaneously defending a model on another thread that relies on some rather extreme bending of electro magnetic waves.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2019, 01:13:03 PM by Unconvinced »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Even if you think you can dispute standard physics with your fake “common knowledge”, given without reference or evidence, you are STILL wrong.  The curve of the earth is the reason given for low frequency waves propagating further, so obviously they aren’t going further than “should” be allowed under normal models.

The curve of the earth is the reason that radio beams jump over the curve? Interesting description. But, unfortunatey, it is just another statement without physical evidence.
No "jump over the curve" is involved. And only a person with no understanding of radio propagation would make a statement like, "But, unfortunatey, it is just another statement without physical evidence".

VLF (3 to 30 kHz) radio propagation achieves its reliable extreme distances because the earth and the lower layers of the ionosphere form a waveguide.
This has been extensively studied for many years because it is of such great interest to the military.

There is quite a deal of general medium level discussion in Wikipedia, such as:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Very low frequency
Propagation characteristics
Because of their large wavelengths, VLF radio waves can diffract around large obstacles and so are not blocked by mountain ranges or the horizon, and can propagate as ground waves following the curvature of the Earth. The main mode of long distance propagation is an Earth-ionosphere waveguide mechanism. The Earth is surrounded by a conductive layer of electrons and ions in the upper atmosphere at the bottom of the ionosphere called the D layer at 60 to 90 km (37 to 56 miles) altitude, which reflects VLF radio waves. The conductive ionosphere and the conductive Earth form a horizontal "duct" a few VLF wavelengths high, which acts as a waveguide confining the waves so they don't escape into space. The waves travel in a zigzag path around the Earth, reflected alternately by the Earth and the ionosphere, in TM (transverse magnetic) mode.

VLF waves have very low path attenuation, 2-3 dB per 1000 km, with little of the "fading" experienced at higher frequencies, This is because VLF waves are reflected from the bottom of the ionosphere, while higher frequency shortwave signals are returned to Earth from higher layers in the ionosphere, the F1 and F2 layers, by a refraction process, and spend most of their journey in the ionosphere, so they are much more affected by ionization gradients and turbulence. Therefore, VLF transmissions are very stable and reliable, and are used for long distance communication. Propagation distances of 5000 to 20000 km have been realized. However, atmospheric noise (sferics) is high in the band, including such phenomena as "whistlers", caused by lightning.

The VLF band is unsuitable for general broadcasting because the low frequency does not allow enough signal bandwidth for speech let alone high-quality music.
Not only that but it needs enormous transmitting arrays as at Exmouth, near Broome in Australia.
Quote from: VK2DOGl
VLF Tx and Antenna
I recently flew to an offshore vessel out of Learmonth airport in the north of WA. On the way out I had an opportunity to grab a pic of the VLF Naval transmitter that was built there in 1967.

The centre tower reaches 1271 feet high, there is 400 km of cable in the ground plane and 58.8 km of cable in the Antenna. The transmitter has a maximum output of 2 MW. That’s one powerful rig!

The LF band, from 30 to 300 kHz has some of the same properties but at these frequencies, the radio waves penetrate further into the ionosphere and reflect from less stable layers and so are not so reliable at extreme distances but they can be used for AM broadcasting.

In the early days of radio broadcasting the BBC realised that this and "collared" the LF band for itself.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
The curve of the earth is the reason that radio beams jump over the curve?
It isn't jumping. It is diffraction.
As waves go past an obstacle, they diffract.

But, unfortunatey, it is just another statement without physical evidence.
Yes, that does seem to be all you have. Statements without any physical evidence or any form of rational backing.

Where is your evidence of these radars that can see further than the curve of Earth allows?
Where is your evidence?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
Another post made without demonstration of physical evidence of this. Interesting. Stories are all you have I guess.

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
Another post made without demonstration of physical evidence of this. Interesting. Stories are all you have I guess.
Yes, it does seem that stories are all you have.

I ask again:
Do you have any evidence of these mythical radars which can see further than the curve of the Earth allows?
Or do you just have stories of their existence?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
Another post made without demonstration of physical evidence of this. Interesting. Stories are all you have I guess.
Yes, it does seem that stories are all you have.

I ask again:
Do you have any evidence of these mythical radars which can see further than the curve of the Earth allows?
Or do you just have stories of their existence?

It is common knowledge and called Over the Horizon Radar. Seeing "over" the horizon is in the name. Lurn moar of your science.

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
It is common knowledge and called Over the Horizon Radar. Seeing "over" the horizon is in the name. Lurn moar of your science.
No it isn't common knowledge.
Over the horizon radar does not see any further than the curve of Earth allows.
Seeing over the horizon doesn't mean it can see further than the curve allows.
Go actually learn the science.

Again, if you wish to appeal to common knowledge and science do you know what else is common knowledge? That Earth is round. Lurn moar of your science.

So I ask again,
do you have any actual evidence, or just stories of these mythical radars or blatant lies about real radar systems?

What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.

No, Tom

What everyone else is saying is bog standard high school level physics.

You are the one saying it’s wrong, so it’s you that needs to provide evidence to the contrary.


*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.

No, Tom

What everyone else is saying is bog standard high school level physics.

You are the one saying it’s wrong, so it’s you that needs to provide evidence to the contrary.

If you admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter then it is merely a story. No evidence. None.

No evidence = Trash science

Go back to school and learn that science requires experimental verification for hypothesis. It is called the Scientific Method.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.
So what would you call "physical evidence" of radio wave propagation?
You can't see, smell, touch or measure radio waves with a ruler so all you can do is to measure their effects and signal strengths etc.

One of the pioneers in ionospheric research was Sir Edward Victor Appleton GBE KCB FRS Nobel Laureate.
While we may not be related I had a "Norman Victor Appleton" uncle about the same age and so have been interested in the ionosphere, especially as my profession was in an area closely related to radio propagation.

If you want to read some detail you might read: Numerical Modelling of VLF Radio Wave Propagation through Earth-Ionosphere Waveguide and its application to Sudden Ionospheric Disturbances all 150 pages.

Edward Appleton was one of the earliest to perform physical measurements of reflections from the ionosphere as described

Quote
Engineering and Technology History Wiki: Edward V. Appleton
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ionosphere Experiments and Radar
In 1924 Appleton began a series of experiments which proved the existence of the ionosphere, a layer in the upper atmosphere. With the cooperation of the BBC, he applied FM to the Bournemouth transmitter and observed a beat between the signal reflected from what he later called the E layer and the outgoing signal, thus proving conclusively the existence of the ionosphere, as well as measuring its height. In 1926 he discovered an upper layer which he subsequently called the F layer (which is also known as the Appleton layer.) It is this layer, unaffected by atmospheric conditions, that allows the transmission of short wave radio around the world.

Appleton’s findings had direct value to the British military during World War II. In a famous publication in 1932, he set forth the now classical magneto-ionic theory which quantitatively describes radio-wave propagation in the ionosphere. Further research provided the basis of the technique developed for aircraft detection. Sir Robert Watson-Watt has stated that, but for the scientific work of Appleton, radar would have come too late to have been a decisive influence in the Battle of Britain.

So what sort of "physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere" do you expect to find.


*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
If you admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter then it is merely a story. No evidence. None.

No evidence = Trash science

Go back to school and learn that science requires experimental verification for hypothesis. It is called the Scientific Method.
Where is you "physical evidence" for a flat earth?
When asked to explain readily observable effects all I've seen from you is conjecture, hypothesis and guesswork.

It works two ways, you know.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18004
Good. You admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter and that you believe in non-science. That is all we need to know here.

*

JackBlack

  • 22532
If you admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter then it is merely a story. No evidence. None.

No evidence = Trash science
Yes, what you are saying is trash science.
So is that all you have?
Or do you have evidence for your currently baseless claims?

You ignoring all science has obtained, just you haven't personally obtained it doesn't magically mean it isn't science.

Another key part of science is not pretending everything is a completely isolated phenomenon.

Anyway, you are the one claiming there is some magical radar system which can see further than the curve of Earth allows, not merely seeing over the curve which can be done in a number of ways, but that it can see further than the curve allows.
So far all you have done is baselessly asserted this with absolutely nothing honest or rational backing it up.

So do you have any evidence for your claim or do you admit that it is mereley a story?

*

Macarios

  • 2093
Diffraction is very well known phenomenon.
People noticed the behavior of waves on water surfaces long time ago.
Since then many forms of waves were observed and measured under many conditions.
Especially electromagnetic waves.

Diffraction of visible electromagnetic waves (light) can be measured using Diffraction Grating.
Quote
In optics, a diffraction grating is an optical component with a periodic structure
that splits and diffracts light into several beams travelling in different directions.
The emerging coloration is a form of structural coloration. The directions of these
beams depend on the spacing of the grating and the wavelength of the light so
that the grating acts as the dispersive element. Because of this, gratings are
commonly used in monochromators and spectrometers.

Diffraction / propagation of radio waves can be measured on physical obstacles.
Physical evidence is well documented and data is available all over the Internet for comparison.
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Good. You admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter and that you believe in non-science. That is all we need to know here.
Where did I say that? I asked:
So what would you call "physical evidence" of radio wave propagation?
You can't see, smell, touch or measure radio waves with a ruler so all you can do is to measure their effects and signal strengths etc.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
So what sort of "physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere" do you expect to find?
So I asked you what you called physical evidence and you refused to answer.

So you explain why VLF and often LF radio signals can propagate anywhere on earth.
But UHF and microwave transmissions are, however, limited to a few hundred kilometres and then only if on tall mountain sites even over water.
Why would that be?

For example why were the terminals of the then longest microwave link placed on mountain sites 2170 m and 2572 m high?
Quote
Microwave Transmission - Microwave Radio Relay - Planning Considerations
The effects of atmospheric stratification cause the radio path to bend downward in a typical situation so a major distance is possible as the earth equivalent curvature increases from 6370 km to about 8500 km (a 4/3 equivalent radius effect). Rare events of temperature, humidity and pressure profile versus height, may produce large deviations and distortion of the propagation and affect transmission quality. High intensity rain and snow must also be considered as an impairment factor, especially at frequencies above 10 GHz. All previous factors, collectively known as path loss, make it necessary to compute suitable power margins, in order to maintain the link operative for a high percentage of time, like the standard 99.99% or 99.999% used in 'carrier class' services of most telecommunication operators.

The longest microwave radio relay known up to date crosses the Red Sea with 360 km hop between Jebel Erba (2170m a.s.l., 20°44'46.17"N 36°50'24.65"E, Sudan) and Jebel Dakka (2572m a.s.l., 21° 5'36.89"N 40°17'29.80"E, Saudi Arabia).
These long distances can only be achieved with very high antenna positions (on mountain tops - just look where 20°44'46.17"N 36°50'24.65"E, Sudan and 21° 5'36.89"N 40°17'29.80"E, Saudi Arabia are - on quite high mountains. Guess what, the "hump" due to curvature is 2,545 m, but refraction allows a bit more reliable range.

Yes, limited by the curvature of the globe earth. So these designers of microwave links are in on the "big secret" and waste all this money making short links or putting towers up on 2,500 m mountains! The number in this conspiracy grows! Everywhere you look little bits or evidence crop up that just do not fit on a flat earth.
Just look at: Designing microwave radio links They remain the preferred backhaul choice for public safety radio networks
I'm sure that those designing these long-distance microwave links know far more than you about the true shape of the earth.

Now where is your physical evidence for the Earth's being flat?

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Microwave repeaters
« Reply #56 on: May 26, 2019, 10:33:44 PM »
Good. You admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter and that you believe in non-science. That is all we need to know here.
Where did I say that? I asked:
So what would you call "physical evidence" of radio wave propagation?
You can't see, smell, touch or measure radio waves with a ruler so all you can do is to measure their effects and signal strengths etc.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
So what sort of "physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere" do you expect to find?
So I asked you what you called physical evidence and you refused to answer.

So you explain why VLF and often LF radio signals can propagate anywhere on earth.
But UHF and microwave transmissions are, however, limited to a few hundred kilometres and then only if on tall mountain sites even over water.
Why would that be?

For example why were the terminals of the then longest microwave link placed on mountain sites 2170 m and 2572 m high?
Quote
Microwave Transmission - Microwave Radio Relay - Planning Considerations
The effects of atmospheric stratification cause the radio path to bend downward in a typical situation so a major distance is possible as the earth equivalent curvature increases from 6370 km to about 8500 km (a 4/3 equivalent radius effect). Rare events of temperature, humidity and pressure profile versus height, may produce large deviations and distortion of the propagation and affect transmission quality. High intensity rain and snow must also be considered as an impairment factor, especially at frequencies above 10 GHz. All previous factors, collectively known as path loss, make it necessary to compute suitable power margins, in order to maintain the link operative for a high percentage of time, like the standard 99.99% or 99.999% used in 'carrier class' services of most telecommunication operators.

The longest microwave radio relay known up to date crosses the Red Sea with 360 km hop between Jebel Erba (2170m a.s.l., 20°44'46.17"N 36°50'24.65"E, Sudan) and Jebel Dakka (2572m a.s.l., 21° 5'36.89"N 40°17'29.80"E, Saudi Arabia).
These long distances can only be achieved with very high antenna positions (on mountain tops - just look where 20°44'46.17"N 36°50'24.65"E, Sudan and 21° 5'36.89"N 40°17'29.80"E, Saudi Arabia are - on quite high mountains. Guess what, the "hump" due to curvature is 2,545 m, but refraction allows a bit more reliable range.

Yes, limited by the curvature of the globe earth. So these designers of microwave links are in on the "big secret" and waste all this money making short links or putting towers up on 2,500 m mountains! The number in this conspiracy grows! Everywhere you look little bits or evidence crop up that just do not fit on a flat earth.
Just look at: Designing microwave radio links They remain the preferred backhaul choice for public safety radio networks
I'm sure that those designing these long-distance microwave links know far more than you about the true shape of the eart
Now where is your physical evidence for the Earth's being flat?
I don't claim to be an expert but I do know a bit about microwave repeater systems.
The antenna on each station
 has to be at optimum height for the spacing between each repeater station.
This spacing is the result of the height of the antenna due to the curvature of the earth.
If the earth was flat there would be no need for repeater stations.
An example is the multiple microwave repeater system which feeds radar information from a long range radar located at Odessa, Texas to the FAA Air Route Traffic Control Center at Fort Worth , Texas.
There are several  repeater stations between Odessa and Fort Worth, a distance of about 300  miles.

If the earth was flat there would be no need for any repeater stations - the radar information could be sent directly from Odessa to Fort Worth.




« Last Edit: May 26, 2019, 10:41:41 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.

No, Tom

What everyone else is saying is bog standard high school level physics.

You are the one saying it’s wrong, so it’s you that needs to provide evidence to the contrary.

If you admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter then it is merely a story. No evidence. None.

No evidence = Trash science

Go back to school and learn that science requires experimental verification for hypothesis. It is called the Scientific Method.

Hahahahaha!

Clearly no one has "admitted" there's no evidence.  Are you even capable of having an honest conversation, without twisting what people are saying to fit your narrow view?

There is evidence of diffraction everywhere.  We did this experiment in school, somewhere around age 13 or 14, IIRC.



And this one:



You can also see this by going to the seaside and looking at how waves interact with harbour walls or other obstacles.  You can marvel at the pretty colours on the back of a CD, which acts as a diffraction grating.  You could talk to acoustic engineers about how diffraction affects speaker placement in recording studios.  Or engineers who design radio and radar systems.  Or in fact ask any qualified physicist in the world.

If you want to believe religious fundamentalists like Rowbotham about reality, that's fine.  But don't pretend any of it is scientific, because it's really not.  It's the anti-science that other anti-science people laugh at for being anti-science.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: jobs that would be different (or not exist at all) if
« Reply #58 on: May 27, 2019, 02:43:00 PM »
What you wrote sounds like more description, assumption, with zero physical evidence for what is happening in the atmosphere.

No, Tom

What everyone else is saying is bog standard high school level physics.

You are the one saying it’s wrong, so it’s you that needs to provide evidence to the contrary.

If you admit that there is no physical evidence for the matter then it is merely a story. No evidence. None.

No evidence = Trash science

Go back to school and learn that science requires experimental verification for hypothesis. It is called the Scientific Method.

Hahahahaha!

Clearly no one has "admitted" there's no evidence.  Are you even capable of having an honest conversation, without twisting what people are saying to fit your narrow view?

There is evidence of diffraction everywhere.  We did this experiment in school, somewhere around age 13 or 14, IIRC.



And this one:



You can also see this by going to the seaside and looking at how waves interact with harbour walls or other obstacles.  You can marvel at the pretty colours on the back of a CD, which acts as a diffraction grating.  You could talk to acoustic engineers about how diffraction affects speaker placement in recording studios.  Or engineers who design radio and radar systems.  Or in fact ask any qualified physicist in the world.

If you want to believe religious fundamentalists like Rowbotham about reality, that's fine.  But don't pretend any of it is scientific, because it's really not.  It's the anti-science that other anti-science people laugh at for being anti-science.
You could also go to the seaside and observe how far out to sea you can see.
If the earth was flat you should be able to see a long distance if it wasn't for the thickness of the atmoplane.
But if you are standing on the shore, you can only see about 2  or 3 miles to the horizon.
Because of the curvature of the earth because the earth is s Globe.
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !