Non-Euclidean Flat Earth (John Davis proposal)

So this seems to regularly come up in other topics, where John claims he’s solved all the flat earth geometry issues with his Non-Euclidean ideas.

Thought we should maybe bring the discussion into one place.  Then we can at least refer here to avoid derailing other conversations.

I did a search, but couldn’t find a main thread specifically on John’s hypothesis.  Apologies if I missed one.  Mods, feel free to combine with another or whatever.

I’ve seen this article, but there may also be others:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/blog/einsteins-relativity-proves-earth-flat

I’ll see if John wants to add anything, before launching into questions (mainly stuff I asked in other threads).

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

Thanks.  I don’t have much time now myself either.  So will come back later.

Just wanted to get the ball rolling really.

Pulling my Q from the other thread

Johnd
In basic english
You took a globe.
Did some fancy math to make it flat.
...
Ergo the earth is flat?

Am i getting that right?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71053.msg1921473#msg1921473

That's all I've gathered on the topic.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71053.msg1921473#msg1921473

That's all I've gathered on the topic.

Great explainer, Jane. Still trying to wrap my head around it. Visuals I've found mostly look like this:

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?

Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

I'm not sure if this is included in Jane's post on the topic, but I have also started down the road of recreated Euclid's geometry through use of a new set of axioms based off the thought experiment above. We shall see if this is worthwhile. In the meanwhile, the current non-euclidean geometry serves well enough for most conversations.

Quote from: John Davis on May 30, 2019, 02:11:16 PM

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

American President of the Flat Earth Society. It has since dissolved into this society. I may rebirth it again.

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?

Of course. What do you think it would prove?

Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

It gives me great joy you call them discoveries.

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? ...

This is, of course, Einstein's Equivalence Principle.

...
If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

The academic establishment undermines science and its role in a free society. I do not see a time where I would ever work for such a body, but that's a conversation more on the sociological / philosophical side of things - and not what I imagine you want an answer to in this thread.

Quote from: John Davis on May 30, 2019, 02:11:16 PM

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html
I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

I hope that you find this useful:

Relativity & The Flat Earth
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The effect of viewing the earth and it appearing round is known as the Ferrari Effect, based off of former Canadian Flat Earth Society President Leo Ferrari who first predicted this. This describes that effect.

Any honest judge will begrudgingly have to admit that I have shown that the flat earth theory directly follows from our laws of motion and coherence with relativity. Even worse is the realization that we would have been lead to relativity sooner if not for our strict faith-like belief in a round earth.

J Davis, American Flat Earth Society President

Just to save anyone looking up details on Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari, here is the entry in the TFES.org Wiki.

Leo Ferrari
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari (8th December 1927 - 7th October 2010), a professor at St. Thomas University, was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada.

Ferrari and Flat Earth

Dr. Ferrari took a very post-modern approach to the Flat Earth Theory, proposing to overturn the authority of scientists and instead rely on one's own perception of the Earth's shape. He argued that no authority can deterministically claim what is and isn't true, and hoped to restore the sense of validity of personal inquiry and perception. This was largely in response to "science's insistence on the things unseen". Ferrari worried that society was being blinded by science and technology, and that they had lost touch with their own bodies and rational conclusions.

His promotional brochure, subtitled "We're on the level", stated the following postulates:

• We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
• All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and... reality is essentially mystical and poetical.
• Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence of his very own eyes!

   
External links
    DR. FERRARI AND THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY by Alden Nowlan
Reference
    The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek

So
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari "was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada" and
John Davis is American Flat Earth Society President.

As Jeranism of YouTube Flat Earth fame said after demonstrating "curvature", That's interesting  . . . very interesting . . .

Leo Ferrari was Australian born and educated. Everyone knows how careful we have to be of Australians .
He was born in Bathurst, New South Wales and received his B.Sc from the University of Sydney in 1948.

PS Note that the url for the publication, "The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek", has changed to https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm.
     Donald E. Simanek wrote many interesting publications. Have a look in Donald Simanek's Pages.
     One such is: Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek.  The evidence is abundant for anyone to observe.

A trip to Antarctica would prove you don't have a debilitating fear of flying, penguins, or cold weather, and you're not locked up in either a jail cell or a mental institution.

Are you a professional book writer, John?

So my starter questions for John:

1.  Does this mean space is real, satellites/probes are real, and/or NASA isn’t generally faking stuff?

2.  Is the warping of spacetime due to gravity or something else?

3.  Are the moon and other planets flat but warped by spacetime the same way the Earth is, or is that unique to the Earth?

A trip to Antarctica would prove you don't have a debilitating fear of flying, penguins, or cold weather, and you're not locked up in either a jail cell or a mental institution.

Are you a professional book writer, John?

I'm a full stack engineer. No, I am not a professional writer, as of yet. My writing has been published before. For example, I know I am in this one. Far cry from professional, but thank you for your misidentification / question. That particular article I posted is quite old.

So my starter questions for John:

1.  Does this mean space is real, satellites/probes are real, and/or NASA isn’t generally faking stuff?

Yes

2.  Is the warping of spacetime due to gravity or something else?

Are you asking whether gravity is due to gravity?

3.  Are the moon and other planets flat but warped by spacetime the same way the Earth is, or is that unique to the Earth?

In so much as they can support an orbit of some kind, the similar logic would apply.

Quote from: Sunset on May 30, 2019, 04:09:12 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 30, 2019, 02:11:16 PM

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html
I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

I hope that you find this useful:

Quote from: John Davis

Relativity & The Flat Earth
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The effect of viewing the earth and it appearing round is known as the Ferrari Effect, based off of former Canadian Flat Earth Society President Leo Ferrari who first predicted this. This describes that effect.

Any honest judge will begrudgingly have to admit that I have shown that the flat earth theory directly follows from our laws of motion and coherence with relativity. Even worse is the realization that we would have been lead to relativity sooner if not for our strict faith-like belief in a round earth.

J Davis, American Flat Earth Society President

Just to save anyone looking up details on Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari, here is the entry in the TFES.org Wiki.

Quote from: TFES.org Wiki

Leo Ferrari
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari (8th December 1927 - 7th October 2010), a professor at St. Thomas University, was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada.

Ferrari and Flat Earth

Dr. Ferrari took a very post-modern approach to the Flat Earth Theory, proposing to overturn the authority of scientists and instead rely on one's own perception of the Earth's shape. He argued that no authority can deterministically claim what is and isn't true, and hoped to restore the sense of validity of personal inquiry and perception. This was largely in response to "science's insistence on the things unseen". Ferrari worried that society was being blinded by science and technology, and that they had lost touch with their own bodies and rational conclusions.

His promotional brochure, subtitled "We're on the level", stated the following postulates:

• We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
• All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and... reality is essentially mystical and poetical.
• Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence of his very own eyes!

   
External links
    DR. FERRARI AND THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY by Alden Nowlan
Reference
    The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek

So
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari "was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada" and
John Davis is American Flat Earth Society President.

As Jeranism of YouTube Flat Earth fame said after demonstrating "curvature", That's interesting  . . . very interesting . . .

Leo Ferrari was Australian born and educated. Everyone knows how careful we have to be of Australians .
He was born in Bathurst, New South Wales and received his B.Sc from the University of Sydney in 1948.

PS Note that the url for the publication, "The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek", has changed to https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm.
     Donald E. Simanek wrote many interesting publications. Have a look in Donald Simanek's Pages.
     One such is: Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek.  The evidence is abundant for anyone to observe.

Yes I gave it his name. No, it has next to nothing to do with him except for a specious similarity to a quote I read once by him in an isolated interview.

Can johnd confirm or deny or edit?:

The earth is a roundish ball and the only way to create a flat map that match known distances is to use math tricks.

Quote from: rabinoz on May 30, 2019, 07:24:00 PM

Quote from: Sunset on May 30, 2019, 04:09:12 PM

Quote from: John Davis on May 30, 2019, 02:11:16 PM

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html
I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?
Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration being similar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

I hope that you find this useful:

Quote from: John Davis

Relativity & The Flat Earth
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The effect of viewing the earth and it appearing round is known as the Ferrari Effect, based off of former Canadian Flat Earth Society President Leo Ferrari who first predicted this. This describes that effect.

Any honest judge will begrudgingly have to admit that I have shown that the flat earth theory directly follows from our laws of motion and coherence with relativity. Even worse is the realization that we would have been lead to relativity sooner if not for our strict faith-like belief in a round earth.

J Davis, American Flat Earth Society President

Just to save anyone looking up details on Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari, here is the entry in the TFES.org Wiki.

Quote from: TFES.org Wiki

Leo Ferrari
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari (8th December 1927 - 7th October 2010), a professor at St. Thomas University, was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada.

Ferrari and Flat Earth

Dr. Ferrari took a very post-modern approach to the Flat Earth Theory, proposing to overturn the authority of scientists and instead rely on one's own perception of the Earth's shape. He argued that no authority can deterministically claim what is and isn't true, and hoped to restore the sense of validity of personal inquiry and perception. This was largely in response to "science's insistence on the things unseen". Ferrari worried that society was being blinded by science and technology, and that they had lost touch with their own bodies and rational conclusions.

His promotional brochure, subtitled "We're on the level", stated the following postulates:

• We believe in terra firma, and the more firmer the less terror.
• All science, like all philosophy and all religion is ultimately metaphorical and... reality is essentially mystical and poetical.
• Our aim is to restore man's faith in Common Sense... Seeing is believing. ...Man has been blinded by metaphysics, brainwashed by popular fallacies and bullied into denying the evidence of his very own eyes!

   
External links
    DR. FERRARI AND THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY by Alden Nowlan
Reference
    The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek

So
Dr. Leo Charles Ferrari "was a co-founder, president, and active member of the satirical group known as the Flat Earth Society of Canada" and
John Davis is American Flat Earth Society President.

As Jeranism of YouTube Flat Earth fame said after demonstrating "curvature", That's interesting  . . . very interesting . . .

Leo Ferrari was Australian born and educated. Everyone knows how careful we have to be of Australians .
He was born in Bathurst, New South Wales and received his B.Sc from the University of Sydney in 1948.

PS Note that the url for the publication, "The Flat Earth by Donald E. Simanek", has changed to https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm.
     Donald E. Simanek wrote many interesting publications. Have a look in Donald Simanek's Pages.
     One such is: Is the earth a spinning, round ball? by Donald Simanek.  The evidence is abundant for anyone to observe.

Yes I gave it his name. No, it has next to nothing to do with him except for a specious similarity to a quote I read once by him in an isolated interview.

Also, stop poisoning the well Rab

Can johnd confirm or deny or edit?:

The earth is a roundish ball and the only way to create a flat map that match known distances is to use math tricks.

I have no idea what a "math trick" is. It seems to me though, using math is fair game. It is no more of a math trick than what Einstein did. In fact, its less so, as it in reality hasn't used any math at all that isn't already present in round earth dialog.

What illusion do you think I'm on about?

I beleive the title is noneuclidean somehing r other, no?
I imagine your map has some function where lines of longitude slowly coverge at a rate of approx x^2 + y^2 for any given latitude.

Its still a ball.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Cooking/comments/38pss9/please_suggest_ridiculously_complicated_names_for/

Can you provide backing for your arguments, or am I to feed pearl to swine?

Sorry - point being, you are trying to redefine what I'm saying as me shoving a globe into a map. That would be against the point.

There are no mathematical tricks to having a different interpretation to a mathematical model that was built of empiricism or any other methodology. There is clearly a separation between the mathematical language that we use to quantify data, and the translation to how we might qualify what it's saying.

As Rowbotham himself pointed out, the Mayan's could predict the heavens as nearly well as what many civilizations strove for for thousands of years afterwards - all through tabulation and calculation. How that tabulation and calculation is interpreted is another mess, and can lead us to many models..

Sorry - point being, you are trying to redefine what I'm saying as me shoving a globe into a map. That would be against the point.

There are no mathematical tricks to having a different interpretation to a mathematical model that was built of empiricism or any other methodology. There is clearly a separation between the mathematical language that we use to quantify data, and the translation to how we might qualify what it's saying.

As Rowbotham himself pointed out, the Mayan's could predict the heavens as nearly well as what many civilizations strove for for thousands of years afterwards - all through tabulation and calculation. How that tabulation and calculation is interpreted is another mess, and can lead us to many models..

Did you happen to come across that FE map you made back in the 2000's that you mentioned? It would be cool to get a look at it.

It was conceptual. The idea was sophomoric and young of me to suggest.

The idea was a dual state reality with a north pole centric azimuthal projection overlayed with a south pole centric one. The collapse of states would result in distances that resembled what we measure now.

It was not my proudest moment in retrospect, and I reject it heartily now.

I'll dig around or try to recreate it for historical reasons. There was a diagram I threw together.

I'll dig around or try to recreate it for historical reasons. There was a diagram I threw together.

No worries. Just curious to see where FE can be taken from a conceptual/cartographic perspective.

Aside from the non-euclidean model, which detractors have labelled a magic "trick", the math in what I said is simple enough.

Build a model of a south centric azimuthal projection. Do so for the north centric projection. Average the movements between the two.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Stash, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Aside from the non-euclidean model, which detractors have labelled a magic "trick", the math in what I said is simple enough.

Build a model of a south centric azimuthal projection. Do so for the north centric projection. Average the movements between the two.

Do you mean "Average the movements between the two" or "Arrange the movements between the two".
I ask only because I'm not sure what "Average the movements between the two" would involve
but "Arrange the movements between the two" would end up with JRowe's Dual Earth Theory. This is described in My DE model explained here.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Stash, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Aside from the non-euclidean model, which detractors have labelled a magic "trick", the math in what I said is simple enough.

Build a model of a south centric azimuthal projection. Do so for the north centric projection. Average the movements between the two.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Stash, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Sounds like what i said...

Quote from: Unconvinced on May 31, 2019, 08:23:13 AM

So my starter questions for John:

1.  Does this mean space is real, satellites/probes are real, and/or NASA isn’t generally faking stuff?

Yes

Good to know.  That appears more rational than all the vast conspiracy theories to me at least.

Quote

2.  Is the warping of spacetime due to gravity or something else?

Are you asking whether gravity is due to gravity?

Asking for clarification.  You have often made arguments based on there being no complete theory for quantum gravity.  So wasn’t sure if gravity as we understand it factors into your hypothesis.

Quote

3.  Are the moon and other planets flat but warped by spacetime the same way the Earth is, or is that unique to the Earth?

In so much as they can support an orbit of some kind, the similar logic would apply.

This is the biggest issue I have with your hypothesis.

An object in orbit around the moon (for example) travels on a geodesic less curved by the effect of gravity (or whatever) on  spacetime than an object in orbit around the Earth.

Yet as the moon is smaller, the surface of the moon is curved more than the earth, which implies it’s more affected by spacetime distortion.

That appears to be a direct contradiction in your hypothesis.

Yes I gave it his name. No, it has next to nothing to do with him except for a specious similarity to a quote I read once by him in an isolated interview.

Nonetheless, it is a fine tribute to the kind of disingenuity his arguments displayed and to which your own seem to aspire. 

Quote from: John Davis on May 30, 2019, 02:11:16 PM

The missing images are here: http://theflatearthsociety.net/relativity.html

I will post more information when I return home.

I hadn't realised we were all speaking with the president! 

Well, Mr. President, would you accept an open invite to Antarctica for a little visit?

Is this what this is all about then? A quest to see who can make all the scientific discoveries in the world satisfy a flat earth model?

There are some jarringly massive leaps of faith in your article, John. For example, the force of accelaration besimilar in effect to the force of gravity, therefore you can conclude they are the same?? They are far from the same. Atoms have their own gravitational pull, all matter has it's own gravitational field, without any movement or accelaration required.

If you have a sincere passion for science, why are you not enrolled in a university putting that mind of yours to good use?

I would also invite Mr. Davis down to any sea shore to see if he can see if he could see all the way to the ice wall (if it wasn't for the Haze of the atmoplane ) and prove the earth is flat or if he would see the horizon about 2 or 3 miles in front of him and prove the earth isn't flat (the globe) ?