GPS

  • 212 Replies
  • 11817 Views
Re: GPS
« Reply #210 on: April 30, 2021, 06:14:32 PM »
This is the ONLY way I was able to make sense of flat earth and only reason I joined this forum, what JackBlack said - is to redefine the spherical model to a flat model, without destroying orbiting satellites. A very, perhaps super benign explanation of why there are orbiting satellites is because I have yet to see GPS work indoors or under a bridge or in a tunnel where many types of RF can penetrate, however, GPS signals do not. Every underpass I drive by or spend time under will block out my GPS lock, so this does suggest orbiting satellites. The math would make sense I believe for an RE transformed into FE model, my only question is, how is it that satellites stay in orbit on a flat earth? What keeps them suspended unless it is lack of gravitational pull toward a large mass (i.e. earth, flat or not)? Maybe my real question is - what -exactly- is gravity?

You appear to have self invented a class of vehicles or objects that work in a way unknown to science.
You should really try reading more.
The satellites his model has orbit Earth, just like the ones in the RE model.

The only difference between the RE model and his model is he redefines flat to match the surface of Earth.

That is why you didn't stand a chance at debating him, because you weren't paying attention to what he had said and instead were just treating it as a FE model based upon the known definitions.

*

JJA

  • 4202
  • Math is math!
Re: GPS
« Reply #211 on: May 01, 2021, 06:01:32 PM »
Maybe my real question is - what -exactly- is gravity?

Nobody knows, but we will eventually figure it out, discovering the particle or force that carries it.

Then the question will be what makes THAT work.

And we will eventually answer that question.

Then the question will be what makes THAT work.

And so on, and so on.  There will always be limits to knowledge, you can always ask WHY enough times to get a "don't know".

But science knows how gravity BEHAVES extremely well.  We know how it operates, what it does, how to measure it.  We know these things with great precision. We measure gravity waves. We measure the weight of individual atoms.  We can predict the motion of planets and send robots out to land on them.

The force that keeps GPS satellites in orbits is well know, after all we put them up there in the first place with that knowledge. If someone wants to claim they are not orbiting a spherical planet, they need to provide an explanation as to just how their alternate theory works, and as you have found out, that's not easy.  There is a reason for this.  :)

Re: GPS
« Reply #212 on: May 01, 2021, 07:41:03 PM »
This is the ONLY way I was able to make sense of flat earth and only reason I joined this forum, what JackBlack said - is to redefine the spherical model to a flat model, without destroying orbiting satellites. A very, perhaps super benign explanation of why there are orbiting satellites is because I have yet to see GPS work indoors or under a bridge or in a tunnel where many types of RF can penetrate, however, GPS signals do not. Every underpass I drive by or spend time under will block out my GPS lock, so this does suggest orbiting satellites. The math would make sense I believe for an RE transformed into FE model, my only question is, how is it that satellites stay in orbit on a flat earth? What keeps them suspended unless it is lack of gravitational pull toward a large mass (i.e. earth, flat or not)? Maybe my real question is - what -exactly- is gravity?

You appear to have self invented a class of vehicles or objects that work in a way unknown to science.
You should really try reading more.
The satellites his model has orbit Earth, just like the ones in the RE model.

The only difference between the RE model and his model is he redefines flat to match the surface of Earth.

That is why you didn't stand a chance at debating him, because you weren't paying attention to what he had said and instead were just treating it as a FE model based upon the known definitions.
I think you may have misunderstood me.
It is literally just redefining words.

His model IS the round Earth model.
It isn't taking the RE model and making some tweaks to it so Earth is flat.
His model is the round Earth model, where he appeals to Non-Euclidean spacetime, geodesics in spacetime, and a property which is true in Euclidean space (but not non-Euclidean spaces, at least not in general) to pretend the surface of Earth can be defined as flat, even though Earth is roughly a sphere.

So in this model, his Earth is roughly a sphere and he just calls it flat.

As such, the orbits for his model works just like you would expect for the RE.
The mass of Earth results in curved space time near it. Thus the satellites follow a geodesic through this curved space time.
This geodesic through space time is an ellipse in space.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2021, 07:42:56 PM by JackBlack »