Maths in regard to the theory

  • 8 Replies
  • 4236 Views
Maths in regard to the theory
« on: May 15, 2019, 01:09:43 PM »
As a keen mathematician, I revel in the chance to prove things in terms of equations. I am wondering if there are any ones that work for the flat earth but not the globe earth
Mark Sargent is bae.

*

rabinoz

  • 24281
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2019, 04:38:09 PM »
As a keen mathematician, I revel in the chance to prove things in terms of equations. I am wondering if there are any ones that work for the flat earth but not the globe earth
Ask Jane, the Flat Earth Researcher. She's a mathematician and might be able to help.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11684
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2019, 05:02:23 AM »
It's not really that simple. Most of the relevant equations are going to be describing real world observations so at the end of the day the FE versions and RE version are going to need to be basically identical if they're going to work. Whatever you believe, no one's going to propose or defend a model that doesn't accurately describe accepted observations, you might get some debate on what are reliable sources but beyond that...
For example, it's generally accepted that the force making something fall under the RE model of gravity is mg, mass times the gravitational constant 9.8m/s/s.
Then you get UA, which ends up with mass times acceleration, once more mg.
If you want to be more adventurous you could get to something like denpressure, which depends on volume and density (increase either and the force goes up) so you get pvd where d is some constant, and if d=9.8 then that's equivalent to, you guessed it, good old mg.


*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15989
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2019, 09:41:34 AM »
Honestly, there is a possibility the two will diverge. Historically, there are a plethora of examples where a new theory disagrees with past empirical readings and yet is shown to be correct. It is a basis of the theory of anarchy in scientific method and also Kuhnian paradigm shift.

Quantum Ab Hoc

*

Kalides

  • 18
  • the more you know the flatter it getīs
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2019, 11:20:06 AM »
As a keen mathematician, I revel in the chance to prove things in terms of equations. I am wondering if there are any ones that work for the flat earth but not the globe earth

Mathematics is not physics. That means, for example, that in mathematics you can have and calculate with n dimensions. But that does not mean, that reality has n dimensions. Physics needs empirical data, mathematics does not.
To me mathematics is the poetry of god, showing the absolute beauty of creation.
So, it is not a mathematical thing, if flat earth exists or not.
believing is a weak form of knowing.

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2019, 06:18:10 PM »
As a keen mathematician, I revel in the chance to prove things in terms of equations. I am wondering if there are any ones that work for the flat earth but not the globe earth

Please see some of my posts for complete theorems and supporting proofs.

Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2019, 06:18:35 PM »
As a physicist, I would agree with your statement.  There are certainly mathematical ideas which are logically consistent with mathematics and may be very elegant solutions yet have no bearing on what the real physical world looks like or behaves like.

As a keen mathematician, I revel in the chance to prove things in terms of equations. I am wondering if there are any ones that work for the flat earth but not the globe earth

Mathematics is not physics. That means, for example, that in mathematics you can have and calculate with n dimensions. But that does not mean, that reality has n dimensions. Physics needs empirical data, mathematics does not.
To me mathematics is the poetry of god, showing the absolute beauty of creation.
So, it is not a mathematical thing, if flat earth exists or not.

*

Yes

  • 575
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2019, 01:24:32 PM »
Danang would also be a fun guy to ping.  He seems to have a replacement for pi called phew that somehow does something for flat earth.  I've been meaning to figure out what on earth he's calculating, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.  I'd love to see what you dig up.

Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Danang

  • 3586
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: Maths in regard to the theory
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2019, 09:19:11 PM »
Thank you, Yes.

I admit area is for pi. But for circumference, one needs phew.

Here is the link about why phew matters for 1D calculation:

https://gwebanget.home.blog/2019/09/12/lets-examine-1-to-figure-out-if-the-arc-is-longer-or-shorter-than-the-outer-base-line/
TRY: Phew = 3.17157 (for C) and (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/