Three different FE’s, three different butchered versions of gravity.

Quote from: Themightykabool on December 23, 2022, 10:02:59 AM

Pv=nrt

Compresed air is hot.

DEcompressing air is cool.

If the air is as thick as water, which you alluded to as the reason peoplel could 'swim' in space, then it would have to be literally as thick as water.

That's funny because I have sprayed a compressed air on my computer and it never feels at all hot.

The air you sprayed was compressed.
What did it then do when it came out the nozzle?
Did you felt the air
Was it the compressed air or the somethingstartswithDE-non-compressed air?

The Vomit Comet is limited in the duration of 0g.
Because it needs to follow a parabolic trajectory. If it continued on that trajectory to give you 0g for longer, it will crash into Earth.
If you want a longer time, you need to go into space and orbit Earth.

Ohhhh I see, so your notion of a 20 second time limit is based on thinking that you'll something run afoul of curvature.

Even though planes are literally capable flying across continents without hitting the curvature, a man tells you he can only do this 20 seconds (must be nice to have paid $8000 for him to only fly 20 seconds) and you buy it.

Nooe, you were conned. And now you're trying to con me into also paying this to "prove you're right."

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

If I did it, it would be for entertainment only, I would go there with full knowledge of things that you seem totally ignorant of.  And $400 per second of weightlessness sounds like a crappy deal.

And instant cooling violates thermodynamics. Or would you expect a blowtorch to spew out ice cool air? Things do cool as they decompress... gradually.

Quote

The Vomit Comet is limited in the duration of 0g.
Because it needs to follow a parabolic trajectory. If it continued on that trajectory to give you 0g for longer, it will crash into Earth.
If you want a longer time, you need to go into space and orbit Earth.

Ohhhh I see, so your notion of a 20 second time limit is based on thinking that you'll something run afoul of curvature.

Even though planes are literally capable flying across continents without hitting the curvature, a man tells you he can only do this 20 seconds (must be nice to have paid $8000 for him to only fly 20 seconds) and you buy it.

Nooe, you were conned. And now you're trying to con me into also paying this to "prove you're right."

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

If I did it, it would be for entertainment only, I would go there with full knowledge of things that you seem totally ignorant of.  And $400 per second of weightlessness sounds like a crappy deal.

And instant cooling violates thermodynamics. Or would you expect a blowtorch to spew out ice cool air? Things do cool as they decompress... gradually.

I have no idea what all that was that you wrote above, but whatevs. In any case, not that I'm promoting the vomit comet excursions, just to set the record straight. Apparently, for your $8,000 you get 15 parabolic stints, not just 1 20 second one. Oooo, and a flight suit to keep.

That aside, given that the experience, though quite expensive, does in fact exist, how does your non-gravity notion explain it?

Also, a quick search on your username brings up some of your more interesting posts elsewhere. You've been kicking this can for a while now and getting punted down the street everywhere you post. Kinda amusing. Do you still believe that people south of the equator hang upside down on a globe earth like you were trotting out back in 2018?

Ohhhh I see, so your notion of a 20 second time limit is based on thinking that you'll something run afoul of curvature.

No, it has nothing to do with the curvature.
The curvature is what allows you to go higher and faster to orbit to provide an unlimited time.

Yet again you are just looking for a pathetic way out.
In order to maintain 0g in the vomit comet, it needs to continue to accelerate towards the ground.
If you keep this up for long enough (without enough sideways velocity to orbit), you hit the ground.
And that is even being nice and ignoring the speed that the plane would need to go which would tear it apart.

If you wanted to go on a suicide run for the longest period of 0g, then from a typical cruising altitude of 35 000 ft or 10 000 m, if you simulated 0 g, you could have a maximum time of 45 seconds before you hit the ground (so 90 seconds total if you magically launch at that speed from the ground). If you account for the curvature of Earth, and the horizontal distance you travel during that time, you can get some more time, but not much, unless your horizontal velocity is so great you orbit Earth instead.

But this hypothetical path would have you flying at ~1600 km/hr when you hit the ground.
Well above the maximum allowable speed.

Back in reality, pilots don't want to kill themselves by having their plane tear itself apart as they fly planning to crash into the ground.
So instead, they pull up early, giving them a nice safe altitude gap between them and the ground.
This further limits the available time.

Nooe, you were conned. And now you're trying to con me into also paying this to "prove you're right."

No, I'm not getting by your delusional BS.
Nor are we trying to have you pay for it.
Stop spouting delusional BS which ignores the argument raised.
Stop just throwing BS against the wall hoping something sticks.

Just look at how pathetic and desperate your position is.
It was clearly indicated that there is a limit because if you kept going you would crash into Earth.
Rather than even attempt to address that, you just go on about curvature, acting like that was the problem, even though curvature would allow more time, not less.

And instant cooling violates thermodynamics.

You sure do love spouting your delusional BS don't you.
Why don't you tell us what part of thermodynamics adiabatic expansion of gases resulting in the gas cooling as a direct result of the laws of thermodynamics violates?

Or better still, why don't you stop with all the BS and tell us how long periods of 0g are achieved?
We know it isn't the vomit comet due to the time being too long.
We know they aren't under water as they can still breath just fine.
We know it isn't a wind tunnel for a multitude of reasons, some being that objects with vastly different mass to volume ratios all float the same, and their hair isn't going wildly all over the place, nor are there any signs of the turbulence expected from a wind tunnel.
We know they haven't compressed the air to make them buoyant in the air, as the pressure required would almost certainly kill people, and even liquifying the air doesn't give it a high enough density for that.

So the only rational option we have left is an experience like the vomit comet, but for a longer duration as they are in free fall in orbit. Where instead of smashing into the ground, their horizontal velocity and the curvature of Earth keeps them from hitting the ground.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 24, 2022, 06:30:31 AM

Quote

The Vomit Comet is limited in the duration of 0g.
Because it needs to follow a parabolic trajectory. If it continued on that trajectory to give you 0g for longer, it will crash into Earth.
If you want a longer time, you need to go into space and orbit Earth.

Ohhhh I see, so your notion of a 20 second time limit is based on thinking that you'll something run afoul of curvature.

Even though planes are literally capable flying across continents without hitting the curvature, a man tells you he can only do this 20 seconds (must be nice to have paid $8000 for him to only fly 20 seconds) and you buy it.

Nooe, you were conned. And now you're trying to con me into also paying this to "prove you're right."

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

If I did it, it would be for entertainment only, I would go there with full knowledge of things that you seem totally ignorant of.  And $400 per second of weightlessness sounds like a crappy deal.

And instant cooling violates thermodynamics. Or would you expect a blowtorch to spew out ice cool air? Things do cool as they decompress... gradually.

I have no idea what all that was that you wrote above, but whatevs. In any case, not that I'm promoting the vomit comet excursions, just to set the record straight. Apparently, for your $8,000 you get 15 parabolic stints, not just 1 20 second one. Oooo, and a flight suit to keep.

That aside, given that the experience, though quite expensive, does in fact exist, how does your non-gravity notion explain it?

Also, a quick search on your username brings up some of your more interesting posts elsewhere. You've been kicking this can for a while now and getting punted down the street everywhere you post. Kinda amusing. Do you still believe that people south of the equator hang upside down on a globe earth like you were trotting out back in 2018?

You are so totally trying to get me to fork out $8000. Just because you got ripped off doesn't mean I want to.

No I don't. The point being that this is what you believe happens under centralized gravity. You can't admit that this is necessarily what you have to accept under RE. A world where roughly half the population hangs upside down. And everyone but those at North Pole hang sideways. And nearly everyone getting affected by rotation. That's 98% of the population having some kind of nausea-inducing condition.

In a flat Earth, you sit upright and aren't rotating. Yes, I accept that. Show me how you manage, hanging upside down and rotating?
 "Say among the nations, The Lord reigns.
    The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved;
    he will judge the peoples with equity."


 

Quote from: Stash on December 24, 2022, 11:08:43 AM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 24, 2022, 06:30:31 AM

Quote

The Vomit Comet is limited in the duration of 0g.
Because it needs to follow a parabolic trajectory. If it continued on that trajectory to give you 0g for longer, it will crash into Earth.
If you want a longer time, you need to go into space and orbit Earth.

Ohhhh I see, so your notion of a 20 second time limit is based on thinking that you'll something run afoul of curvature.

Even though planes are literally capable flying across continents without hitting the curvature, a man tells you he can only do this 20 seconds (must be nice to have paid $8000 for him to only fly 20 seconds) and you buy it.

Nooe, you were conned. And now you're trying to con me into also paying this to "prove you're right."

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

If I did it, it would be for entertainment only, I would go there with full knowledge of things that you seem totally ignorant of.  And $400 per second of weightlessness sounds like a crappy deal.

And instant cooling violates thermodynamics. Or would you expect a blowtorch to spew out ice cool air? Things do cool as they decompress... gradually.

I have no idea what all that was that you wrote above, but whatevs. In any case, not that I'm promoting the vomit comet excursions, just to set the record straight. Apparently, for your $8,000 you get 15 parabolic stints, not just 1 20 second one. Oooo, and a flight suit to keep.

That aside, given that the experience, though quite expensive, does in fact exist, how does your non-gravity notion explain it?

Also, a quick search on your username brings up some of your more interesting posts elsewhere. You've been kicking this can for a while now and getting punted down the street everywhere you post. Kinda amusing. Do you still believe that people south of the equator hang upside down on a globe earth like you were trotting out back in 2018?

You are so totally trying to get me to fork out $8000. Just because you got ripped off doesn't mean I want to.

Ummm, what are you talking about?

No I don't. The point being that this is what you believe happens under centralized gravity. You can't admit that this is necessarily what you have to accept under RE. A world where roughly half the population hangs upside down. And everyone but those at North Pole hang sideways. And nearly everyone getting affected by rotation. That's 98% of the population having some kind of nausea-inducing condition.

In a flat Earth, you sit upright and aren't rotating. Yes, I accept that. Show me how you manage, hanging upside down and rotating?
 "Say among the nations, The Lord reigns.
    The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved;
    he will judge the peoples with equity."

Again, what are you talking about? There's no standing sideways or hanging upside down in RE. I would think you would have learned that by now. Apparently not. You don't even know what you're arguing against. Sad.

- And for one, that biblical passage could be interpreted in myriad ways, many of which would have nothing to do with the actual earth, rotation, spherical nature, whatever.
- For two, the world in biblical times was about the size of Mesopotamia, that's it. One can't quite expect for those folks to have a handle on the entirety of earth, flat or round.
- For three, the bible isn't the only "holy" book in town.
- For four, the bible has nothing to do with the shape of the earth or the physics associated with it. It's like saying that the bible didn't recognize or speak of smart phones, therefore they don't and can't exist.

You are so totally trying to get me to fork out $8000.

No, we aren't.
Just what at all is there to make you claim such delusional garbage?

You can't respond to what has been said, so you need to resort to this dishonest BS?

The point being that this is what you believe happens under centralized gravity.

No, the point is that this is what all the evidence demonstrates.
Evidence you are unable to refute and need to resort to the dishonest BS above.

You can't admit that this is necessarily what you have to accept under RE. A world where roughly half the population hangs upside down.

How many times will you repeat this same delusional BS?
No one has to hang upside down.
That is your fantasy.

With a RE, down is towards the centre of Earth.
Those at the north pole and south pole, both stand on the ground below them. No one hangs upside down.

And nearly everyone getting affected by rotation. That's 98% of the population having some kind of nausea-inducing condition.

You mean the incredibly slow rotation of ~1 revolution per day, which shouldn't induce nausea at all.

Once more, you spout delusional BS because you can't demonstrate any actual fault with the RE.

The Bible is a book full of pure BS, it has no place in any rational debate.
If you need to cling to fairy tales to try and prop up your delusional garbage, it means you believe a fairy tale, not reality.


Now again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?

We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

Again, what are you talking about? There's no standing sideways or hanging upside down in RE. I would think you would have learned that by now. Apparently not. You don't even know what you're arguing against. Sad.

In order for centralized gravity to work, you accept the following must be true.



You accept this is true without knowing you are accepting it. Meanwhile, I accept this to be true, human beings stand upright because directionality always points to a sensible direction of fall. 



On all points of a disc, down is the same.

...You don't even know what you're arguing against. Sad.

1. And for one, that biblical passage could be interpreted in myriad ways, many of which would have nothing to do with the actual earth, rotation, spherical nature, whatever.
2. For two, the world in biblical times was about the size of Mesopotamia, that's it. One can't quite expect for those folks to have a handle on the entirety of earth, flat or round.
3. For three, the bible isn't the only "holy" book in town.
4. For four, the bible has nothing to do with the shape of the earth or the physics associated with it. It's like saying that the bible didn't recognize or speak of smart phones, therefore they don't and can't exist.

1. The passage is interpreted as God having ultimate authority in all matters. Full passage:

Sing to the Lord a new song;
    sing to the Lord, all the earth.
Sing to the Lord, praise his name;
    proclaim his salvation day after day.
Declare his glory among the nations,
    his marvelous deeds among all peoples.
For great is the Lord and most worthy of praise;
    he is to be feared above all gods.
For all the gods of the nations are idols,
    but the Lord made the heavens.
Splendor and majesty are before him;
    strength and glory are in his sanctuary.
Ascribe to the Lord, all you families of nations,
    ascribe to the Lord glory and strength.
Ascribe to the Lord the glory due his name;
    bring an offering and come into his courts.
Worship the Lord in the splendor of his holiness;
    tremble before him, all the earth.
Say among the nations, “The Lord reigns.”
    The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved;
    he will judge the peoples with equity.
Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad;
    let the sea resound, and all that is in it.
Let the fields be jubilant, and everything in them;
    let all the trees of the forest sing for joy.
Let all creation rejoice before the Lord, for he comes,
    he comes to judge the earth.
He will judge the world in righteousness
    and the peoples in his faithfulness.

He made the Earth, and it can't be moved.  All references to round Earth, rotating Earth, outer space, or climate change are all sad human attempts to claim that God did not make the Earth that it cannot be altered.

2. No, it wasn't. The Bible references the whole world. They mention plants and animals that are the result of trade. In the story of Joseph (in Genesis), they mention a famine of seven years from an eastern wind.  A review of this time period places one of two causes, an extreme volcanic eruption that blotted out the sun in a large period of land or a certain war where "divine weapons" (nukes) were used.
Moreover, not only Israel and Babylonia, but Greece, Assyria, Chaldea, China, Sumeria, Australia, Oceania, Masai, Chippewa, Choctaw, and South America all have flood stories.

3. Correct. But the cultures of the world at the time were worshiping idols and engaging in human sacrifice. Not exactly role model behavior.

4. That would be true if it were an isolated incident, and science weren't making a concerted attempt to create a false reality.  Every single RE model is an attempt to pave over the spiritual reality of this Earth. But God's world cannot be moved. It is a kingdom that cannot be overthrown by humans, even if the thousandth generation forgets that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. You can say all you want, but the truth is the truth. The Lord reigns, even though the princes of the Earth create false reality to claim they instead are in charge.  The Lord reigns, even though you offer fealty to a model of the Earth that has you bending over and turned around instead of standing upright.

In order for centralized gravity to work, you accept the following must be true.

You mean where every person is standing upright, with the ground below them, with no one hanging upside down like your delusional claim? Where we have a rational reason for why down is down, as it is towards Earth.

You accept this is true without knowing you are accepting it. Meanwhile, I accept this to be true, human beings stand upright because directionality always points to a sensible direction of fall.

Sensible, like down being towards Earth, instead of delusional BS where down is just down with no reason at all.

1. The passage is interpreted

The passage is from a fairy tale.
Are you saying you believe a fairy tale over reality?

If your unholy book contradicts reality, it is wrong, not reality.
So using the Bible to try and demonstrate Earth is flat only helps demonstrates the Bible is wrong.


Now again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?

We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

Down is down.

The delusion is yours, not mine. When you join the church of globalism, you accept their notion that any gravity is as good as any other.  Where down can be up or sideways, or whatever the hell they say it is.

We have rational reason to believe down is down. It's because the top of a disc has no underside.

Just as you can't stand upside-down on a ledge,

down is down, and nothing you can say will change that.   

It's globalism that is irrational. 

Down is down.

Down is towards the centre of Earth.
So the delusional is entirely yours.

You are the one claiming such utter garbage as those in the south magically need to hang upside down, even though in that model (which reflects reality), down is towards the centre of Earth, meaning the people in the south are still standing upright with Earth down below them.

You repeatedly misrepresenting the RE model to pretend there is a problem is just demonstrating your dishonesty and desperation.

We have rational reason to believe down is down. It's because the top of a disc has no underside.

No, you don't.
Appealing to the top already appeals to a direction of down, so you fail right there.

It's globalism that is irrational.

If it is irrational then why are you incapable of showing any fault with it and instead need to repeatedly lie about it, including repeating the same pathetic refuted lie multiple times?

If it was actually irrational, you would easily be able to demonstrate the problems with it.

For example, your excuses for how 0 g is simulated are irrational, and have been repeatedly demonstrated to be faulty and incapable of explaining these long duration clips of 0g.

So much so that you need to repeatedly flee from it.

Now again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?

We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

North is the center of the Earth.
Down is towards the core of the Earth.

These two things are different.

You repeatedly misrepresenting the RE model to pretend there is a problem is just demonstrating your dishonesty and desperation.

I'm misrepresenting nothing. This is exactly how round Earth is depicted. You're sulking because you don't like what it really looks like. You have central gravity, and you don't like the results so you go and cry foul because it doesn't match your logic. But you have to suck it up. Because that's how central gravity works. You get to stand upside down (and sideways) when you are on the underside of the globe while I get to walk upright (and sideways) because I am in the northern hemisphere and thus better than you.

We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

You know nothing (Jon Snow)

Down is down.

How does the accelerometer inside your kindle know "down is down"? What's it do to determine that? And how do the calculations derive it?

North is the center of the Earth.
Down is towards the core of the Earth.

North is not the centre of Earth.
The core is the centre of Earth.

North is the direction of the angular momentum vector.

I'm misrepresenting nothing.

Yes you are.
You repeatedly lie by pretending there is some magical universal down in the RE model such that people in the south need to hang upside down.
That is delusional BS which is not part of the model at all, nor is it any conclusion drawn from the RE model.

That is your delusional BS from your delusional FE model, to pretend there is a universal down and then applying that to the RE model.

If you weren't being dishonest, if you weren't blatantly misrepresenting the RE model at almost every opportunity, then you would accept that someone standing in the southern hemisphere, is standing upright, with down being towards the centre of Earth, with Earth below them.

But that would mean you can't use all the BS arguments you have been trying to.
So you blatantly lie by misrepresenting the RE model to pretend that people in the south are hanging upside down.

You have central gravity

And you blatantly lie about what that would mean.
With this, down is towards the centre.

You get to stand upside down because you are on the underside

No, you get to stand right side up because down is towards the centre.
There is no top or bottom of a globe.

The only way you can pretend there is a top is by reference to something else.
For example, if you take a soccer ball and place it on Earth, then the top is the part furthest away from Earth.
But that is not part of the soccer ball. That is simply due to its position and orientation relative to Earth.
If you rotate the ball, the "top" of the ball changes, clearly demonstrating that "top" is only due to Earth below it.

So if you take Earth, in the vacuum of space, there is no top or bottom.
There is the outside of Earth, and regardless of what direction you are in from Earth, down is towards Earth.

There is absolutely no basis at all for your delusional garbage that the north pole is some magical top of Earth and the south pole is some magical bottom.

The only way in which the north pole is special, is due to the rotation of Earth and using a right hand rule.
But you can just as easily depict Earth in any orientation.
None is more valid than any other.
Likewise, you can arbitrarily pick any point on the surface and boldly proclaim is the magical top.
Regardless of which point you pick, it will be delusional BS.

You know nothing

So you still can't answer the questions then and need to resort to more pathetic garbage.
You should really try growing up some time.

Why not at least grow a spine and admit you can't explain it, but you reject reality because you don't like it?

Again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?
We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 05:17:41 PM

Down is down.

How does the accelerometer inside your kindle know "down is down"? What's it do to determine that? And how do the calculations derive it?

It doesn't.

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor) detects tilt or angular stuff. It's a fancy electronic level. It doesn't understand up and down! It only understands that the front is leaning or the back is leaning. Or the sides are leaning.

And the LORD asked me, “What do you see, Amos?” “A plumb line,” I replied.

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor)

Rejecting the existence of accelerometers which can determine the direction of down doesn't help your case.
It just shows how pathetic you are.


If they only had laser ring gyroscopes, any power loss would result in it having no idea which way is down, and it would drift significantly over time.

Again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?
We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

Quote from: Stash on December 25, 2022, 07:15:44 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 05:17:41 PM

Down is down.

How does the accelerometer inside your kindle know "down is down"? What's it do to determine that? And how do the calculations derive it?

It doesn't.

It does and you've already been provided evidence of such from accelerometer manufacturers and companies that use them in many a product.

Single- and multi-axis accelerometers can detect both the magnitude and the direction of the proper acceleration, as a vector quantity, and can be used to sense orientation ,coordinate acceleration, vibration, shock, and falling in a resistive medium (a case in which the proper acceleration changes, increasing from zero).

And you've already been shown evidence of these utilizing G in the calculations. Or have you simply forgotten all of that evidence.

As well, you've provided zero evidence.

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor) detects tilt or angular stuff. It's a fancy electronic level. It doesn't understand up and down! It only understands that the front is leaning or the back is leaning. Or the sides are leaning.

Again, you've already been shown evidence of the existence and utilization of accelerometers used in many a device. Even one that you own. Or have you simply forgotten all of that evidence.

From Apple:
Getting Raw Accelerometer Events
Retrieve data from the onboard accelerometers.

An accelerometer measures changes in velocity along one axis. All iOS devices have a three-axis accelerometer, which delivers acceleration values in each of the three axes shown in Figure 1. The values reported by the accelerometers are measured in increments of the gravitational acceleration, with the value 1.0 representing an acceleration of 9.8 meters per second (per second) in the given direction. Acceleration values may be positive or negative depending on the direction of the acceleration.


OEM Accelerometer U3030 BMA282 For IPhone 6S 6SPlus

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 07:49:15 PM

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor)

Rejecting the existence of accelerometers which can determine the direction of down doesn't help your case.
It just shows how pathetic you are.


If they only had laser ring gyroscopes, any power loss would result in it having no idea which way is down, and it would drift significantly over time.

I'm not rejecting the existence of accelerometers. I'm rightly referring to the video I saw where the man took apart a kindle and saw no accelerometer, only some light sensing equipment. Optical sensing gyroscopics doesn't work in the same way. Sorry.

But  the point is, even if we were dealing with an accelerometer, none of this technology has a real sense of up or down. Neither do we. Standing on a hill, you have only to turn around to turn up into down. No car needed. You can turn around and walk down the hill.

In the mean time, if I drop a penny, because it heavier than air, it will fall down. And it will slide down the hill. The penny knows what way is down. The accelerometer, for all its supposed programming can be tricked. If I hold the kindle up towards the hill, or down against the hill, it doesn't know there is a hill there. The penny knows there is a hill there. A penny has not been designed with gravity in mind. It has never heard of gravity. The engineers at the mint didn't design it with that in mind. Yet it knows where to go because of its mass.

Quote from: JackBlack on December 25, 2022, 08:48:11 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 07:49:15 PM

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor)

Rejecting the existence of accelerometers which can determine the direction of down doesn't help your case.
It just shows how pathetic you are.


If they only had laser ring gyroscopes, any power loss would result in it having no idea which way is down, and it would drift significantly over time.

I'm not rejecting the existence of accelerometers. I'm rightly referring to the video I saw where the man took apart a kindle and saw no accelerometer, only some light sensing equipment. Optical sensing gyroscopics doesn't work in the same way. Sorry.

You're the one who should be sorry, because you're wrong, yet again...

Kindle Fire HD Teardown
Published: September 16, 2012

The backside of the board is mostly blank, save for the InvenSense MPU-6050 gyroscope / accelerometer (Black outlined chip on the left) and one of the two Wi-Fi antennas used for MIMO technology

But  the point is, even if we were dealing with an accelerometer, none of this technology has a real sense of up or down. Neither do we. Standing on a hill, you have only to turn around to turn up into down. No car needed. You can turn around and walk down the hill.

Here's a quick little tutorial from, I'm sure, a NASA Freemason NWO demon on how accelerometers work, where located in an iPhone, and how it determines up and down...

How a Smartphone Knows Up from Down (accelerometer)


As well, again...
From Apple:
Getting Raw Accelerometer Events
Retrieve data from the onboard accelerometers.

An accelerometer measures changes in velocity along one axis. All iOS devices have a three-axis accelerometer, which delivers acceleration values in each of the three axes shown in Figure 1. The values reported by the accelerometers are measured in increments of the gravitational acceleration, with the value 1.0 representing an acceleration of 9.8 meters per second (per second) in the given direction. Acceleration values may be positive or negative depending on the direction of the acceleration.


OEM Accelerometer U3030 BMA282 For IPhone 6S 6SPlus

Note the 3 axis technology? What does that tell you?

So now you're saying that you know more than Apple as to what components go into Apple phones and how they work?

How exactly have you arrived at knowing more about Apple products than Apple?

I'm not rejecting the existence of accelerometers.

Yes, you are.
You are pretending they don't exist (or aren't used at all), and instead appealing to wilful ignorance to pretend it is all done user a laser ring gyroscope.

But  the point is, even if we were dealing with an accelerometer, none of this technology has a real sense of up or down. Neither do we. Standing on a hill, you have only to turn around to turn up into down. No car needed. You can turn around and walk down the hill.

An accelerometer can tell you which way is down. How?

In the mean time, if I drop a penny, because it heavier than air, it will fall down.

Why?
Why should things being heavier than air make them fall?

Yet it knows where to go because of its mass.

You mean gravity acting on its mass.
It's mass alone provides no reason for it to go down.

Again, care to try explaining how the long periods of weightlessness are observed?
We know it can't be the vomit comet, because that would require the plane to plow through Earth to give the required duration.
We know it can't be water, because the people are breathing, which they can't do under water.
We know it can't be compressed air, as compressing it to a liquid would require pressure likely to kill a person, and still wouldn't produce the required density, and it doesn't explain the objects of drastically different density being weightless.
We know it can't be wind, as that would create significant turbulence and need the objects to have comparable mass to area ratios, with small balls being blown away with wind strong enough to keep people afloat, and the turbulence expected isn't seen at all.

The only explanation which works that we know of is that they are in orbit. i.e. like the vomit comet, but because the horizontal velocity is fast enough, and Earth is curved, they don't crash into the ground.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 26, 2022, 06:37:45 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on December 25, 2022, 08:48:11 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 07:49:15 PM

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor)

Rejecting the existence of accelerometers which can determine the direction of down doesn't help your case.
It just shows how pathetic you are.


If they only had laser ring gyroscopes, any power loss would result in it having no idea which way is down, and it would drift significantly over time.

I'm not rejecting the existence of accelerometers. I'm rightly referring to the video I saw where the man took apart a kindle and saw no accelerometer, only some light sensing equipment. Optical sensing gyroscopics doesn't work in the same way. Sorry.

You're the one who should be sorry, because you're wrong, yet again...

Kindle Fire HD Teardown
Published: September 16, 2012

The backside of the board is mostly blank, save for the InvenSense MPU-6050 gyroscope / accelerometer (Black outlined chip on the left) and one of the two Wi-Fi antennas used for MIMO technology

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 26, 2022, 06:37:45 AM

But  the point is, even if we were dealing with an accelerometer, none of this technology has a real sense of up or down. Neither do we. Standing on a hill, you have only to turn around to turn up into down. No car needed. You can turn around and walk down the hill.

Here's a quick little tutorial from, I'm sure, a NASA Freemason NWO demon on how accelerometers work, where located in an iPhone, and how it determines up and down...

How a Smartphone Knows Up from Down (accelerometer)


As well, again...
From Apple:
Getting Raw Accelerometer Events
Retrieve data from the onboard accelerometers.

An accelerometer measures changes in velocity along one axis. All iOS devices have a three-axis accelerometer, which delivers acceleration values in each of the three axes shown in Figure 1. The values reported by the accelerometers are measured in increments of the gravitational acceleration, with the value 1.0 representing an acceleration of 9.8 meters per second (per second) in the given direction. Acceleration values may be positive or negative depending on the direction of the acceleration.


OEM Accelerometer U3030 BMA282 For IPhone 6S 6SPlus

Note the 3 axis technology? What does that tell you?

So now you're saying that you know more than Apple as to what components go into Apple phones and how they work?

How exactly have you arrived at knowing more about Apple products than Apple?

Who says I do?

Apple knows about their products plenty. But their aim is to inflate and overstate their products in order to impress you and thus sell merch.
If they can say that it shoots out laser beams in order to accurately measure distance between objects, they will. Laws against false claims aren't that good. They have to prove that fraud caused actual harm. Otherwise, it's tort law at best, and the only complaint of fraud is minor.

Also, how did we get from Amazon to Apple? I don't buy Apple crap.

I don't claim to know more than anyone (this is a claim you make of me, that I'm boasting and arrogant), but I do observe a fair amount. I've use said devices, and based my assumptions on when, exactly, the rotation kicks in. It behaves more or less identical to a level.

And I'm sorry but you're an expert on microchips? I might  not be smarter than Apple, but like the joke about the bear chasing two people, I only need to be better than you.
The accelerometer chip even looks different from the picture below and in fact all of these part, not just the square are for an accelerometer to operate. So if we had an accelerometer, we should expect it hooked to a port, not simply the single box that for all you know could be microchip operating to something else.

Here's one without that box even.

Note the GND, SDA, SCL, VCC, CS, SDO, INT1, INT2.
These bumps are on nearly every accelerometer picture I've found typing "accelerometer" into the picture search engine.





It's not the microchip (a generic square chip) that matters, but pretty much all of these have this system of prongs in some order. The chip just processes the information. In fact some of these don't even have the same chip type (rectangular rather than square, multiple chips, etc) but all have this designation. They're likely hooked to prongs and the prongs relay XYZ info.

Notice it is on all accelerometer chips I showed, but I see no such dots on either the Apple or the Kindle. Something they tell gullible fools to oversell a much cheaper product.

So the guy, is he a demonic Freemason? He could be. But he's more like a shill to sell tech. A salesman overstating product.

You really are stupid.

Those "bumps" are soldering points for wires as those pictured are stand alone circuit boards.

The Apple and Kindle boards have the accelerometer built directly on their board.  Those connections exist but are built within the board.

Quote from: Stash on December 26, 2022, 07:06:19 AM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 26, 2022, 06:37:45 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on December 25, 2022, 08:48:11 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 25, 2022, 07:49:15 PM

If you are on an incline going uphill, or an incline going down, the accelerometer (which doesn't exist because we have an optical sensor)

Rejecting the existence of accelerometers which can determine the direction of down doesn't help your case.
It just shows how pathetic you are.


If they only had laser ring gyroscopes, any power loss would result in it having no idea which way is down, and it would drift significantly over time.

I'm not rejecting the existence of accelerometers. I'm rightly referring to the video I saw where the man took apart a kindle and saw no accelerometer, only some light sensing equipment. Optical sensing gyroscopics doesn't work in the same way. Sorry.

You're the one who should be sorry, because you're wrong, yet again...

Kindle Fire HD Teardown
Published: September 16, 2012

The backside of the board is mostly blank, save for the InvenSense MPU-6050 gyroscope / accelerometer (Black outlined chip on the left) and one of the two Wi-Fi antennas used for MIMO technology

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 26, 2022, 06:37:45 AM

But  the point is, even if we were dealing with an accelerometer, none of this technology has a real sense of up or down. Neither do we. Standing on a hill, you have only to turn around to turn up into down. No car needed. You can turn around and walk down the hill.

Here's a quick little tutorial from, I'm sure, a NASA Freemason NWO demon on how accelerometers work, where located in an iPhone, and how it determines up and down...

How a Smartphone Knows Up from Down (accelerometer)


As well, again...
From Apple:
Getting Raw Accelerometer Events
Retrieve data from the onboard accelerometers.

An accelerometer measures changes in velocity along one axis. All iOS devices have a three-axis accelerometer, which delivers acceleration values in each of the three axes shown in Figure 1. The values reported by the accelerometers are measured in increments of the gravitational acceleration, with the value 1.0 representing an acceleration of 9.8 meters per second (per second) in the given direction. Acceleration values may be positive or negative depending on the direction of the acceleration.


OEM Accelerometer U3030 BMA282 For IPhone 6S 6SPlus

Note the 3 axis technology? What does that tell you?

So now you're saying that you know more than Apple as to what components go into Apple phones and how they work?

How exactly have you arrived at knowing more about Apple products than Apple?

Who says I do?

Apple knows about their products plenty. But their aim is to inflate and overstate their products in order to impress you and thus sell merch.
If they can say that it shoots out laser beams in order to accurately measure distance between objects, they will. Laws against false claims aren't that good. They have to prove that fraud caused actual harm. Otherwise, it's tort law at best, and the only complaint of fraud is minor.

Also, how did we get from Amazon to Apple? I don't buy Apple crap.

I don't claim to know more than anyone (this is a claim you make of me, that I'm boasting and arrogant), but I do observe a fair amount. I've use said devices, and based my assumptions on when, exactly, the rotation kicks in. It behaves more or less identical to a level.

And I'm sorry but you're an expert on microchips? I might  not be smarter than Apple, but like the joke about the bear chasing two people, I only need to be better than you.
The accelerometer chip even looks different from the picture below and in fact all of these part, not just the square are for an accelerometer to operate. So if we had an accelerometer, we should expect it hooked to a port, not simply the single box that for all you know could be microchip operating to something else.

Here's one without that box even.

Note the GND, SDA, SCL, VCC, CS, SDO, INT1, INT2.
These bumps are on nearly every accelerometer picture I've found typing "accelerometer" into the picture search engine.





It's not the microchip (a generic square chip) that matters, but pretty much all of these have this system of prongs in some order. The chip just processes the information. In fact some of these don't even have the same chip type (rectangular rather than square, multiple chips, etc) but all have this designation. They're likely hooked to prongs and the prongs relay XYZ info.

Notice it is on all accelerometer chips I showed, but I see no such dots on either the Apple or the Kindle. Something they tell gullible fools to oversell a much cheaper product.

So the guy, is he a demonic Freemason? He could be. But he's more like a shill to sell tech. A salesman overstating product.

Wow, just wow.  Go learn something before you assume and try to use it in a conspiracy theory please.

Who says I do?

Your claim that they don't use accelerometers.
A claim you can't defend at all.

Laws against false claims aren't that good. They have to prove that fraud caused actual harm. Otherwise, it's tort law at best, and the only complaint of fraud is minor.

An actual case against false advertising can cost very large amounts of money.

I don't claim to know more than anyone

Yes, you do; by claiming it does not have an accelerometer.

It behaves more or less identical to a level.

Which would use an accelerometer, not a gyroscope.

I might  not be smarter than Apple, but like the joke about the bear chasing two people, I only need to be better than you.

No, you need to be better than anyone trying to claim it has an accelerometer.

The accelerometer chip even looks different from the picture below and in fact all of these part

And care to try explaining what each part of that does?
Do you have any idea at all?
Do you even know what all of those components are?

Do you even understand that there can be different accelerometers, that they don't all need to appear identical?

Here's one without that box even.

You mean here is one showing the back side of the board.
Here is the other side of that board (you already provided it further down):

Note the GND, SDA, SCL, VCC, CS, SDO, INT1, INT2.
These bumps are on nearly every accelerometer picture I've found typing "accelerometer" into the picture search engine.

And do you know what any of that means, what any of that is used for?
This is used to power the chip and communicate with the rest of the device.
If you integrate it onto the board of the main device you do not need these breakout pins.
This is only used so people can easily buy a board that is an accelerometer and hook it up, and have access to all the functionality of it.
If you are designing a board, you might not need all of that so might intentionally leave some out.

As for what it all is:
GND and VCC are power.
One is the positive rail, one is the negative rail.
This is used to power the device.
However, as this runs on a particular voltage, and might be attached to a device which operates on a different voltage, the board also includes a voltage regulator. This regulates the voltage to ensure the power provided to the accelerometer chip is appropriate, even with a much wider range of input voltages.
This also includes capacitors (the small beige colour boxes) to smooth the power against ripples from changes in operating currents of either this device or other components elsewhere in the circuit. There is one on both sides of the voltage regulator.
If you mount these on a circuit board with the bigger device, it is not needed. It can either operate at the same voltage, or, like most devices, have multiple voltage rails with the regulators for them elsewhere.

INT1 and INT2 are for interrupts. This is so this chip can tell the main processor that something should happen so the main processor can then switch to performing a task specific to this. These are programable, where you can set it to a wide variety of things including detecting taps (single or double), or activity/inactivity.

The remaining 4 pins are used for the 2 methods of data transfer.
I could go through explaining what each of these does if you really need it, but the important part is that this is for data transfer. Again, if it is hooked up directly to the main processor, you don't need these as breakout pins.

In addition, these have resisters attached to pull them to the appropriate voltage rail. e.g. the CS pin is pulled high by a resistor. This is so if it is not attached to a device it wont try to communicate. It also means it will default to I2C mode. So if you just want to communicate with I2C, you can skip the resister and directly tie this to the high voltage side.
And again, these resistors all can be elsewhere on the main board (if it is all on the one board, you don't need a resister for every chip. The main board can have a single resister for each line.

And the final part is a reverse polarity protection diode.

None of these additional components can measure directionality, either through a laser ring gyroscope or an accelerometer.
The only device remaining is the chip.

It's not the microchip (a generic square chip) that matters, but pretty much all of these have this system of prongs in some order. The chip just processes the information.

Pure BS.
Those "prongs" just provide an electrical connection to the main board.
It is the chip that contains the accelerometer.
Everything else is just to power it and support communication.
You find these on all little breakout boards.
For example, here is one for a real time clock:


From you spouting such delusional garbage, it demonstrates you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, or you are intentionally spouting pure BS.
It shows your level of desperation and dishonesty.

Wow, just wow.  Go learn something before you assume and try to use it in a conspiracy theory please.

Uhhh, I did? I learned that accelerometer cards are typically marked X Y Z with an arrow. They want you toknow they are an accelerometer so someone working on it doesn't assume it is a card for more space, and add things thar screw up the accelerometer or something. I also learned that all of these have those dimples, and the other side of those dimple have metal prongs. Accelerometer devices are mounted on, they are not a single chip like what you pointed out. And for that matter, I learned that in an accelerometer, the device seems to work by the pathway. As the larger device leans, these dimple/prong things route power at a different rate due to angular momentum. And to answer Guy from the Shining, you can't "devote a whole card to it", it is a chip designed to sit atop another card because it depends on the shifting motion it gets from the entire device turning. How do I know this? Simple. I observed it. I looked at common points of all the chips and all of them had a pathway system.

That you pointed out is just a microchip. Its function is likely storage or processing. But you see that empty spot next to it? You could add one of these accelerometer chips.

I don't know 100% or even 80% about what computer cards and slots are. But unlike you tools, I can look at something and figure it out. Just because something is a box, and someone else says it is an accelerometer, doesn't mean it is an accelerometer. I saw several labelings of box, and even rectangle instead of a box microchips. That wasn't what mattered. It is the distinctive feed pattern that seems to make an accelerometer, and I don't see that remotely on these. It also has a distinctive marking system, including XYZ arrows. Again, absent.
3P7LA. That's what the supposed U3030 thing says on it. If they wanted you to know it was a special chip, wouldn't it be made with the prong things like all of these? Wouldn't it be marked U3030?
No don't answer. Rhetorical, because everything you say is a lie, including accusing me of lying when I make observations that any reasonable person should make.

It's easy to say why Apple and Amazon are lying about their products. Such lies save them in cost.

But we should talk about why you're lying. Especially when it is so obvious from looking at all these chips that the layout could be done on a single chip mounted on the card, but such a chip is not there, and you're telling me the whole card needs to be devoted to it.

You really are stupid.

No, I'm really not. But you're either stupid or evil, because either you go around spreading false information deliberately, or you're a gullible stooge who falls for what people tell you.

Let's be generous, and call you evil.

As for me, I make observations, and the first on I made is that there is a reason, why despite these chip looking different, they all have a similar path and purpose. A purpose notably absent from this card.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 29, 2022, 07:31:37 AM

Who says I do?

Your claim that they don't use accelerometers.
A claim you can't defend at all.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 29, 2022, 07:31:37 AM

Laws against false claims aren't that good. They have to prove that fraud caused actual harm. Otherwise, it's tort law at best, and the only complaint of fraud is minor.

An actual case against false advertising can cost very large amounts of money.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 29, 2022, 07:31:37 AM

I don't claim to know more than anyone

Yes, you do; by claiming it does not have an accelerometer.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 29, 2022, 07:31:37 AM

It behaves more or less identical to a level.

Which would use an accelerometer, not a gyroscope.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 29, 2022, 07:31:37 AM

I might  not be smarter than Apple, but like the joke about the bear chasing two people, I only need to be better than you.

No, you need to be better than anyone trying to claim it has an accelerometer.

The remaining 4 pins are used for the 2 methods of data transfer.
I could go through explaining what each of these does if you really need it, but the important part is that this is for data transfer. Again, if it is hooked up directly to the main processor, you don't need these as breakout pins.

Ummm, so I showed what actual accelerometer devices look like. Is that not defending my claim?

Yes, false advertising can set you back thousands or millions. That's assuming people care. If the optical display  does what it's supposed to, Amazon can win the case every time by convincing the judge (who doesn't understand computers) that because it rotates, it must have an accelerometer. The judge doesn't know optical sensors can be jerry-rigged to check tilt or that gradually they fail, resulting in a cheaper product.
Nor do they care. The purpose of fraud trials is to check whether anyone is damaged by the fraud. This is the legal perception of such a thing. If DuPont says their product is safe, and people get bleeding from their eyes? Class action lawsuit. If nobody is bothered by the fraud (aside from the guy who opened it up), you have no case. Think about how easy it is for you to tell me, "No there is an accelerometer and you don't know anything." Apple or Amazon will use this same tactic, and simply turn their device to "prove" they have an accelerometer. The fraud case will be dismissed against them. Again and again.

Which is you. I need to be smarter than you, not Apple. That was the point of the joke. Apple is not trying to convince me, you are. They are trying only to save money. Saving money is no crime, but forcing ppl to pay (tax) money is.

Levels, gyroscopes, and accelerometer all rely on the same principles. Tilt (angular momentum).

I couldn't pretend to explain what each of the those prongs does. You seem more than willing to do that, but I don't believe any of it. But I can explain that the entire chip seems built on a pathway system (which is absent from the card) that probably relies on angular stuff that makes certain sides move slower or faster. None of this is present on the card, nor is there an XYZ marker. Don't you think if you wanted customers to find your accelerometer, you would add an XYZ designation somewhere? As it is, you cannot prove this chip is not for some other purpose, and the presence of ports tells me it is. This is for additional storage or something. That's a guess, but after seeing what actual accelerometer cards look like, nothing you say will convince me that I'm looking at an accelerometer.

So yes, it's fraud, but nobody is gonna sue over it.

Now, people should sue NASA because they make billions in tax money. None of this is justified. Every rocket that goes up is added to the backs of small businesses and working moms. If even one of these things NASA does is a fraud, that's damage to such people. Money they personally had to pay that NASA has to pay back. And each separate case is an additional fine. All of this money should go back to taxpayers, and we can give it to cellphone companies to make proper systems instead of fake helium "satellites". Or to buy more Kindles, whether or not they have an accelerometer (it doesn't matter). NASA has hoarded such wealth and it's time to return it.

Levels, gyroscopes, and accelerometer all rely on the same principles. Tilt (angular momentum).

Wait, so now you're saying that accelerometers measure tilt? You said this before:

It is not an accelerometer but a light sensor that determines tilt.

So yes, it's fraud, but nobody is gonna sue over it.

So what's your evidence that accelerometers are fraud? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

...we can give it to cellphone companies to make proper systems instead of fake helium "satellites".

Wait, and what's your evidence for helium "satellites"? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

Oh, and btw, the opening clip in the video you posted is, in fact, fake:

"Yes, the clip is fake. It was shot in a studio in London in spring 2002. It was based on an idea by director Adam Stewart, who was a space exploration nut. He had read the conspiracy theory sites and decided he wanted to make a spoof based on the idea that the Apollo 11 moonlanding was faked."
https://web.archive.org/web/20030610181152/moontruth.com/full.htm

My goodness, you are a sheeple to any conspiracy that comes along. You'll fall for anything that fits your no-evidence belief system. Sheeple all the way.

Uhhh, I did? I learned that accelerometer cards are typically marked X Y Z with an arrow. They want you toknow they are an accelerometer so someone working on it doesn't assume it is a card for more space, and add things thar screw up the accelerometer or something. I also learned that all of these have those dimples, and the other side of those dimple have metal prongs. Accelerometer devices are mounted on, they are not a single chip like what you pointed out. And for that matter, I learned that in an accelerometer, the device seems to work by the pathway. As the larger device leans, these dimple/prong things route power at a different rate due to angular momentum.

You really do love spouting absolute BS don't you?
Again, do you know what you are spouting is pure BS or are you truly this deluded, stupid, brainwashed, and wilfully ignorance?

The vast majority of that has been addressed, and what is added on is just truly delusional BS with no explanation nor justification.
It doesn't route power differently depending on angular momentum.
What makes you think that? Is it just your latest excuse to pretend that it isn't an accelerometer and that accelerometers aren't real?
Because guess what? Even that excuse fails entirely.

This doesn't work on angular momentum at all.
It is an accelerometer.
You can place it in whatever orientation you want, and power it up, and it will tell you that orientation.
You can then power it down (so it has no way at all to know how it is moving, and no "differential power routing based on angular momentum" or whatever other BS you want to throw at it), change its orientation, even move it to another part of Earth, and turn it on again, and it will again correctly report its orientation.
So unless you want to claim it has an incredibly accurate laser ring gyroscope, which it uses to detect the rotation of the spinning round Earth to determine its orientation relative to the rotation axis, and then a built in GPS reciever which aquires a position lock almost instantly to determine the angle of Earth's surface relative to the spin axis, to then calculate the orientation of the device, then you are spouting delusional BS.
Especially as that still wouldn't tell it about acceleration.
Because this device detects linear acceleration, which involves no angular momentum at all. So you also need the GPS to be incredibly accurate so it can record how its position is changing to calculate the acceleration.

Or you could just take the sane option and accept that it is an accelerometer.

Just where did you "learn" that delusional BS?
Because it seems like you didn't learn anything.
Instead, you had your delusions challenged, so you dug down and looked for more BS excuses to pretend your delusional BS is correct.

And to answer Guy from the Shining, you can't "devote a whole card to it", it is a chip designed to sit atop another card because it depends on the shifting motion it gets from the entire device turning. How do I know this? Simple. I observed it. I looked at common points of all the chips and all of them had a pathway system.

So you looked at some common points, common to plenty of simple boards like that which have nothing at all to do with accelerometers, which have a entirely logical explanation; and then decided to spout pure delusional BS to try and prop up your delusional fantasy.

That you pointed out is just a microchip.

It is a MEMS accelerometer.
Notice something else in common with all the boards you provided? A chip like that (or comparable).
That chip is the accelerometer.

I don't know 100% or even 80% about what computer cards and slots are.

If you are being honest, then I would estimate closer to 0%. You clearly either have no idea at all what you are talking about or are you intentionally lying to everyone.

But unlike you tools, I can look at something and figure it out.

Clearly, you can't.
As if you could, you wouldn't have spouted such delusional BS.
Unlike you, I have actually built circuits, including designing them.
Unlike you, I understand that those bits you are appealing to in no way act as an accelerometer.

You are spouting delusional BS to try to prop up your prior delusional BS.

3P7LA. That's what the supposed U3030 thing says on it. If they wanted you to know it was a special chip, wouldn't it be made with the prong things like all of these?

No, why would it?
Again, if you actually understood the purpose of those prongs, you would know that it doesn't need those.
Those are for hobbyist to build a device out of small boards.
They are not needed for custom PCBs.
If you want the chip to build your own board with a small form factor, it wont come with all that extra baggage. It will just be the chip.

Wouldn't it be marked U3030?

And more ignorance.
No, it wouldn't.
U3030 is a label for the schematic.
See, when you construct PCBs, especially complex ones, there is a part list.
Each component will be given a number.
This number will start with a letter to represent what type of thing it is, with these potentially varying depending on who makes them.
Some common ones are R for resisters, C for capacitors, L for inductors, S for switches, J for pinouts or jacks, D for diodes, Q for Transistors, U for microchip, and so on.
Then it has a number. For simple PCBs, this is often just a sequence, starting from 1 and going up.
But for complex devices, it can be easier to manage by having a number indicating what board or section it is, and then a number to indicate the part number on that board/section.
So I assume this U3030 means it is the 30th microchip on the 3rd section/board.
Typically the silk screen will be marked with this code.

The code on the chip will differ.
As it is a SMD, it is quite small, so the space is limited, so it is used for other marks, and would typically only have a single letter or 2 to identify the product, if any at all. Instead, they focus on things like tracability with a lot code.

No don't answer. Rhetorical, because everything you say is a lie, including accusing me of lying when I make observations that any reasonable person should make.

The issue isn't the observation, it is the delusional BS you are spouting which comes from those.
If you had any understanding of electronics at all, or any experience putting together hobbyist electronics, you would instantly recognise what you are spouting as pure delusional BS.

But sure, dismiss everything as a lie because you can't handle the truth.
That does seem to be par for the course for you.

It's easy to say why Apple and Amazon are lying about their products.

No, it is easy for trolls to assert they are lying, but much harder to defend such bold lies.

But we should talk about why you're lying. Especially when it is so obvious from looking at all these chips that the layout could be done on a single chip mounted on the card, but such a chip is not there, and you're telling me the whole card needs to be devoted to it.

No, you are the liar tring to claim the entire card needs to be devoted to an accelerometer.
We are the ones that recognise a single chip on those boards you provided is the accelerometer, with rest associated with power and communication, designed for hobyists to easily use without needing to design their own PCBs or solder components on other than wires or pin headers.

But you're either stupid or evil, because either you go around spreading false information deliberately, or you're a gullible stooge who falls for what people tell you.

Once more, that would be you.
Here you are, spouting pure delusional BS about accelerometers, which almost anyone with a brain who wants to actually look into it can very quickly tell is pure BS. But that doesn't stop you spouting such delusional BS.
So which is it?
Are you a troll, a conman, or a brainwashed fool?

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 30, 2022, 06:38:01 AM

Levels, gyroscopes, and accelerometer all rely on the same principles. Tilt (angular momentum).

Wait, so now you're saying that accelerometers measure tilt? You said this before:

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 10, 2022, 01:06:47 AM

It is not an accelerometer but a light sensor that determines tilt.

Sorry, maybe I have trouble speaking clearly. The device inside the Kindle is a simple light sensor, not an accelerometer.

But all devices measure tilt. Not "gravity."

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 30, 2022, 06:38:01 AM

So yes, it's fraud, but nobody is gonna sue over it.

So what's your evidence that accelerometers are fraud? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

Sorry, maybe I have trouble speaking clearly. Accelerometers are as real as other devices made to measure tilt. But Amazon and Apple do not use accelerometers. They are probably custom parts, and there's no need for them when other devices do the same job. None of these devices measure "gravity" they measure tilt. Amazon could probably put a level inside their device if it would fit, and the same result.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 30, 2022, 06:38:01 AM

...we can give it to cellphone companies to make proper systems instead of fake helium "satellites".

Wait, and what's your evidence for helium "satellites"? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

Oh I'm sorry, maybe you're incapable of reading. At some point, I quoted that NASA uses helium, for various programs. They claim they need it for other things, but later articles mention that they do use it for balloons.

https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/07/01/long-distance-radio-transmissions-prove-that-the-earth-is-flat/

There may very well be objects in the atmosphere that perform the functions of what are today called satellites. But these satellites are not in outer space; they are actually tethered beneath massive helium balloons, floating very high in the atmosphere. 22 Indeed, a little-known fact is that NASA annually consumes millions of cubic feet of gaseous helium that it uses to fill balloons to carry satellites into the upper atmosphere. 23

In 2014, NASA contracted with Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. of Allentown, Pennsylvania, to supply “128.6 million cubic feet of gaseous helium to support operations at 13 NASA locations” 24 over the next five years, from 2015 to 2019. Yet in a report to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, it was revealed that NASA needed a total of 401,535 million cubic feet of gaseous helium from 2015 to 2019. 25 The 2015 report states that “[t]he two major Federal users of helium are NASA and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).” 26 The report reveals that NASA consumes more than twice the helium consumption of the entire U.S. Military. It is not clear why the contract to supply NASA’s helium needs understates the actual needs of NASA by almost threefold.

Of course, NASA has a ready cover story for this massive helium consumption by what is supposed to be a space agency. In its publically posted 2014 document awarding the helium supply contract, NASA reported its reason for needing helium.

Helium is used throughout NASA as a cryogenic agent for cooling various materials and in precision welding applications, as well as lab use. Helium also is used as an inert purge gas for hydrogen systems and as a pressurizing agent for ground and flight fluid systems of space vehicles. 27

Notice that there is no mention of using helium for balloon projects. But in the 2015 report to Congress, the Secretary of the Interior explained in detail one of the reasons NASA needed helium. It was a reason that NASA did not mention in its public notice of the helium contract. The 2015 Congressional report states that “[h]elium is used at all NASA Field Centers, as well as at NASA’s Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility (CSBF) for their balloon campaigns in Antarctica and in the United States.” 28 The real reason NASA needs helium is to fill balloons for floating objects in the upper atmosphere that they falsely portray as satellites located in outer space.

And you conveniently call videos fake when they don't serve your purposes.

The fact is, any video you use regarding space can be done by Hollywood, and in fact has been done by Hollywood at least once, including ones about exploring Mars. Yet you don't seem capable of making the connection.

Ummm, so I showed what actual accelerometer devices look like. Is that not defending my claim?

No, it isn't. Not at all.
Because each of those boards you provided contained an accelerometer, as well as parts for power and communication.
You have provided nothing to defend your delusional BS that it isn't the chip which is the accelerometer, nor nothing to indicate that devices like smart phones, useless Apple shit and Kindles don't have an accelerometer.

If the optical display  does what it's supposed to, Amazon can win the case every time by convincing the judge (who doesn't understand computers) that because it rotates, it must have an accelerometer.

Wrong again.
You clearly don't understand how trials work or the use of expert witnesses.

The purpose of fraud trials is to check whether anyone is damaged by the fraud.

Not a simple fraud case, a false advertising case.
Even if no one is harmed, a false advertising case can cost a lot of money, as people might not have purchased the product if they weren't subjected to the false advertising.

Which is you. I need to be smarter than you

And you clearly aren't.
If you truly believe the delusional BS you have been spouting, then I'm surprised you know how to turn on a computer and type on it.

Levels, gyroscopes, and accelerometer all rely on the same principles.

And more delusional BS.
They rely upon quite different principles.
A gyroscope is based upon angular momentum.
An accelerometer is based upon linear momentum.
You cannot use a gyroscope in place of an accelerometer.

I couldn't pretend to explain what each of the those prongs does.

Because you clearly have absolutely no idea.
Unlike me, who has actually designed, and assembled electronic circuits, and knows quite well what they are.
You can't con me with your delusional BS, because I actually know what those "prongs" do.

but I don't believe any of it

Of course you don't, because it doesn't fit your delusional fantasy and you don't care about the truth at all.
You are desperate to defend your delusional BS, so you will happily use whatever other delusional BS you can.

But I can explain that the entire chip seems built on a pathway system

Yes, a fairly simple pathway. There is the power, where you have ground connected to a ground plane, and VCC which goes through a voltage regulator and into the chip (with a capacitor on each side).
You then have the communication pathways, with resistors to tie them high or low as appropriate, or in one case a level shifter.

If you look closely at the PCB in question (which that picture is no where near good enough to do so), you will see the same thing. But instead of large breakout pads, it just goes to the required parts of the PCB, or to the connectors on it.

nor is there an XYZ marker.

Technically there is, if you understand the chip.
It has a pin1 marking in one corner.
That tells you which way is X, which way is Y and which way is Z.

Don't you think if you wanted customers to find your accelerometer, you would add an XYZ designation somewhere?

Firstly, Apple is known for not wanting their devices to be repairable, and to repair at the board level at best.
So no, they don't want anyone to find it.
But more importantly, that orientation marker is used for hobbyists.

As it is, you cannot prove this chip is not for some other purpose

You mean you can't prove your delusional BS.
You cannot prove that this chip is not an accelerometer, nor you can provide anything at all which would indicate to anyone that someone entirely ignorant of electronics that an accelerometer needs more than that chip.

That's a guess

Not really.
It is a pathetic attempt at an excuse to pretend your delusional BS is correct.
A pathetic attempt which requires not knowing or ignoring so much about electronics.
The components you are appealing to can be found on countless boards.
Did you even bother looking at the RTC I provided?
Did you notice how it also has the GND, VCC, SDA and SCL connectors?
Did you notice how it also has the resisters, capacitors and a diode on it?

See, this is what an honest person, who is interested in the truth would be looking for.
They would look at plenty of these little circuit boards for different purposes and recognise that these things you are appealing to is common among them.
They would also try to investigate what they are for, and recognise that they are for providing power and communication.
They would recognise that it has nothing at all to do with being an accelerometer, and instead it is a key part of those boards (the chip on it) which is the accelerometer, while other boards have either different chips or different things entirely (like relays)
They would also do a more thorough search for accelerometers rather than you likely desperately cherry picked examples.
For example, they might go to mouser and search for accelerometers:
https://www.mouser.com/c/sensors/motion-position-sensors/accelerometers/?orgKeyword=accelerometer

And they will finds things like this:


And recognise that it is the chip on those boards which is the accelerometer.

But of course, you would never do that, as you don't want an honest inquiry, you don't care about the truth.
All you care about is trying to prop up your delusional BS.

nothing you say will convince me that I'm looking at an accelerometer.

Even without that, nothing would convince you of the truth, because you don't care about the truth.

So yes, it's fraud

Yes, your comments are blatant lies, to try and prop up more delusional lies.

If even one of these things NASA does is a fraud

Yet you can't demonstrate any of it is.

to make proper systems instead of fake helium "satellites".

You mean real satellites, including ones which countless people use everyday, which you are yet to demonstrate a single fault with.
Why would you want to take money away from that, and put it towards helium "satellites", which Google abandoned?

Unless you can provide a reason to watch your useless video, I see no reason to both padding its view count or waste my time viewing it.
So far every video you have provided has just been more BS and more deflections from your inability to justify your delusional BS.

[conspiracy nut.com]

Why don't you try providing a valid source, rather than a conspiracy site happy to lie to people?