The star of the show

Who or what is this star? Its the James Web telescope of course.
The new science produced and questions raised by this telescope  in the short time it’s been active is quite amazing.
While humanity is probing the universe almost to the beginning of time, if there was an actual beginning, there is  a stoic closed minded ignorant bunch who refuse to acknowledge its existence and prefer instead to pin all their hopes and beliefs on conspiracy backed by shakey images from an out of date P900, totally ignoring the actual real reasons their images are shakey and blurry!
To them the spectacular Webb images produced are no more than a hoax. Just one on the many tens of  thousands of daily hoaxes pulled each moment just to keep them, and everyone else in the dark, and to hide the truth that the earth is apparently flat. All the satellites, space stations and other junk we can actually see orbiting the Earth are a product of mass hallucinations.

Flat earthers are like a dog with an imaginary bone preferring to ignore a juicy nutricious ribeye in favour of chewing on nothing much.

https://webbtelescope.org/news/first-images/gallery

Radius of curvature of the Universe: 31 kilometers



The calculation was carried out by Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century.

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, 'the universe would not even reach to the moon'".

If the ether drift field (zero point energy, scalar waves) does exist, then the radius of curvature of the observable universe is 31 km.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

C. P. Enz, A. Thellung : Nullpunktenergie und Anordnung
nicht vertauschbarer Faktoren im Hamiltonoperator ,
Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 839–848 (1960) pg 842

https://academic.oup.com/astrogeo/article/53/1/1.24/218451

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0810.2213.pdf

Earlier, I stated that the upper bound of the distance to Sirius is less than 50 km:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1795032#msg1795032

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, the radius of the universe would then be 31 km."

This is precisely what happens in reality.

The distance from the center of the flat surface of the Earth to the top of the second dome is 31 km.




By the way... can you explain to your readers why those satellites do not register the orbital Sagnac effect?

Radius of curvature of the Universe: 31 kilometers

You have had that BS refuted countless times. Why waste everyone's time bringing it up again?
Again, all it takes is a 63 km drive to see that is wrong.

By the way... can you explain to your readers why those satellites do not register the orbital Sagnac effect?

You have also had all that BS refuted as well.
The "orbital Sagnac" effect is nothing like you claim.

The existence of ether is proven by Bell's theorem.

Not my claim: the calculations for LISA prove that the orbital Sagnac effect is much larger than the rotational Sagnac effect. Why then is it not registered by the GPS satellites?

Why does the distribution of the Riemann zeta function zeros show the same statistical pattern as the spectra of atomic energy levels? How could nature have solved the Riemann hypothesis before the initiation of the big bang?

The existence of ether is proven by Bell's theorem.

Not my claim: the calculations for LISA prove that the orbital Sagnac effect is much larger than the rotational Sagnac effect. Why then is it not registered by the GPS satellites?

Why does the distribution of the Riemann zeta function zeros show the same statistical pattern as the spectra of atomic energy levels? How could nature have solved the Riemann hypothesis before the initiation of the big bang?

And you were wrong about Chicago skyline showing the world was flat, when it real proves the earth is spherical.

Your opinions have no credibility. 

The Chicago skyline debate:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64904.0

Why not increase the distance to 145.6 km?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=84051.msg2268263#msg2268263

This thread is about the distance to the stars.

Pauli had calculated that, if ether does exist, then the radius of curvature of the universe amounts to 31 kilometers (radius of curvature means lookind upwards, not driving around in a car for some distaNce, it is not the radius of a circle; the terrain itself might have thousands of kilometers, yet the distance to the dome is some 31 km, that is the meaning of the radius of curvature). And ether does exist. Therefore, all of the images taken by any telescope/observatory are of heavenly bodies which are to be found very close to us, having a very small diameter.

The Chicago skyline debate:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64904.0

Why not increase the distance to 145.6 km?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=84051.msg2268263#msg2268263

This thread is about the distance to the stars.

Pauli had calculated that, if ether does exist, then the radius of curvature of the universe amounts to 31 kilometers (radius of curvature means lookind upwards, not driving around in a car for some distaNce, it is not the radius of a circle; the terrain itself might have thousands of kilometers, yet the distance to the dome is some 31 km, that is the meaning of the radius of curvature). And ether does exist. Therefore, all of the images taken by any telescope/observatory are of heavenly bodies which are to be found very close to us, having a very small diameter.

So.  You have a long history of pushing falsehoods and junk science.  Thanks for confirming. 

The calculation was carried out by Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century.

How about this calculation.  Bs factor is equal to some guys calculating multiplied by actual observational factors multiplied by impact on reality.

Huh, you come up with zero by my calculations.  Do you have any stated theory from your calculation that matches reality with published results?

You said something about the moon?  But we know from radar data how far the moon is from earth.  And we know Mars is farther away than the moon.  And we know the moon is a physical object that blocks the sun’s radiation during a solar eclipse.

Pauli's calculation stands true. Bell's celebrated theorem, which has been proven to be true experimentally, shows the existence of ether. Therefore the radius of curvature of the universe is 31 kilometers. There's nothing that you can do about that.

Anything involving radar must take into account the ether barrier above our atmosphere: the speed of light, and thus the distance to be calculated, will be modified by the ether (subquark waves).

The stars/planets are very small and orbit very closely above the atmosphere.

By the way... can you explain to your readers why those satellites do not register the orbital Sagnac effect?

Shrugs..

Sagnac effect in GPS

Sagnac Effect and SET Error Based Pseudorange Modeling for GPS Applications

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050916304835


In this paper, an algorithm is proposed to estimate the SET and correct the satellite position for sagnac effect. Here the error in SET is modeled by taking into account the satellite clock aging parameters and the elliptical trajectory of the satellite, similarly the sagnac effect is corrected considering the earth's rotation during the signal propagation time.

The stars/planets are very small and orbit very closely above the atmosphere.

Just simple observations proves your wrong.  Sorry. 

Pauli's calculation stands true. Bell's celebrated theorem, which has been proven to be true experimentally, shows the existence of ether. Therefore the radius of curvature of the universe is 31 kilometers. There's nothing that you can do about that.

Anything involving radar must take into account the ether barrier above our atmosphere: the speed of light, and thus the distance to be calculated, will be modified by the ether (subquark waves).

The stars/planets are very small and orbit very closely above the atmosphere.

Ok?  And your wrong…

Radar Reaches the Moon

https://www.rfcafe.com/references/radio-news/radar-reaches-moon-april-1946-radio-news.htm#:~:text=Distinct%20echo%20at%20about%20238%2C000,to%20moon%20is%20238%2C857%20miles.

You know radar.  Used to accurately locate ships and aircraft for safety and stuff.  Or take out enemy aircraft. 

The stars/planets are very small and orbit very closely above the atmosphere.

Care to draw how a solar eclipse works in your model? 

These are the upper forums, where you are expected to understand the issues which are debated.

The calculations for LISA were performed: the orbital Sagnac effect is much greater than the rotational Sagnac effect. Why is this effect not registered by the GPS satellites? If they were orbiting the Sun, it must have been registered, yet it is nowhere to be found.

It's one thing to use the radar here ON Earth, quite another to send signals to the Moon, THROUGH the ether barrier/dome.

You must be new here, or without any experience in the field. Do you understand where we are going when you are asking about solar eclipses? Exactly, you are going to have to explain the Allais effect.

Pauli's calculation is correct. Bell's theorem proves the existence of ether. We are done here.

These are the upper forums, where you are expected to understand the issues which are debated.

The calculations for LISA were performed: the orbital Sagnac effect is much greater than the rotational Sagnac effect. Why is this effect not registered by the GPS satellites? If they were orbiting the Sun, it must have been registered, yet it is nowhere to be found.

It's one thing to use the radar here ON Earth, quite another to send signals to the Moon, THROUGH the ether barrier/dome.

You must be new here, or without any experience in the field. Do you understand where we are going when you are asking about solar eclipses? Exactly, you are going to have to explain the Allais effect.

Pauli's calculation is correct. Bell's theorem proves the existence of ether. We are done here.

You can’t draw a working model of a solar eclipse using your BS.  Interesting. 

You must be new here,

Been here long enough when you tried to play the Chicago skyline BS that you ran from the argument when it was pointed out the observations are made from a 250 foothill and only upper parts of the buildings are visible.  And the amount of those buildings are seen changes from day to day from the amount of refraction.  So.  Earth spherical.  And your opinion can’t be trusted to model the real world.  Or you could draw out how a solar eclipse works. 

Your neurons must be cemented. What is there to draw? You mean this?

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/







These photographs show the Dark Sun covering the visible Sun during a solar eclipse; moreover, the diameter of the Sun is that of the Burj Khalifa tower.

Your neurons must be cemented. What is there to draw? You mean this?

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/







These photographs show the Dark Sun covering the visible Sun during a solar eclipse; moreover, the diameter of the Sun is that of the Burj Khalifa tower.

Really.  That’s not drawing out how a solar eclipse works.  Sorry your BS model is an utter joke. 

Your neurons must be cemented. What is there to draw? You mean this?

It’s pretty easy to model and makes sense with the heliocentric model.  It’s quite clear even when not drawn to scale.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2017/08/22/flat-earthers-declare-solar-eclipse-just-proved-earth-flat/amp/

Can you draw out how a solar eclipse works with your BS? 

Not my claim

Yes your claim, based upon blatant misrepresentation of the work of others.

If you want to discuss this go back to any of the previous threads on it where you have been repeatedly refuted only to flee like a coward because you couldn't defend your lies, and couldn't act like an adult and admit you were wrong.

The Chicago skyline debate:

Yes, where you were clearly shown to be wrong.

Pauli had calculated that, if ether does exist, then the radius of curvature of the universe amounts to 31 kilometers

We can stop at ether needing to exist. There is no proof of it.
And again, if the radius of curvature is 31 km, then a simple drive of 62 km shows it is wrong.
If the terrain itself has thousands of km, then the radius of curvature is either entirely meaningless, or much larger than 31 km.

the distance to the dome is some 31 km, that is the meaning of the radius of curvature

No, it isn't.
That is another example of a blatant lie from you, where you take the work of a scientist, and blatantly lie about it, to pretend it props up your delusional BS.
It does not.
If the radius of curvature is 31 km, as any kind of meaningful limit to the size of the universe, then the entire universe can be contained inside a sphere with a radius of 31 km.

Bell's celebrated theorem, which has been proven to be true experimentally, shows the existence of ether.

And more lies.
Bell's theorem says nothing at all about the existence of ether.

These are the upper forums, where you are expected to understand the issues which are debated.

Which also applies to you.
This means you shouldn't just be repeatedly spouting the same refuted BS.
You should understand those refutations and understand that you are wrong.

But instead, you play dumb.
You bring up the same refuted BS as if it hasn't been refuted countless times before.

LISA

Like I said, go back to the thread on LISA where you were refuted.
And deal with it there.

It's one thing to use the radar here ON Earth, quite another to send signals to the Moon, THROUGH the ether barrier/dome.

You mean through space.
There is no evidence of any magical ether barrier/dome.

Do you understand where we are going when you are asking about solar eclipses?

Yes, the complete inability of the FE model to explain eclipses.
We are not going to your delusional BS of the Allais effect, which cannot even be proven to be real.

Your neurons must be cemented. What is there to draw? You mean this?

A diagram of your fantasy delusional, explaining how the eclipse occurs.
Something no FEer has ever been able to do.

These photographs show the Dark Sun covering the visible Sun during a solar eclipse;

Why not just use the common name for it? The moon?

the diameter of the Sun is that of the Burj Khalifa tower.

If it was, then the apparent (angular) size of the sun would vary dramatically, just like if you were driving around and changing your distance to the Burj Khalifa. (There is no reason to throw in tower. If you wanted to use the word tower, you can call it the Khalifa tower.

The calculations of Pauli stand correct: everyone knows that the radius of curvature is not the radius of a circle. His result is: if ether exists, then that radius of curvature measures 31 km.

Bell's theorem is the most direct proof of the existence of ether: it was even proven experimentally.

Pauli's result and Bell's theorem prove my assertions.

I told you that I'd make a flat earth believer out of you.

PS It cannot be the Moon since you cannot explain the Allais effect at all: Allais performed all of the necessary calculations, the results were millions of times greater than the luni-solar component, a different heavenly body was passing in front of the Sun.

The calculations of Pauli stand correct: everyone knows that the radius of curvature is not the radius of a circle. His result is: if ether exists, then that radius of curvature measures 31 km.

Bell's theorem is the most direct proof of the existence of ether: it was even proven experimentally.

Pauli's result and Bell's theorem prove my assertions.

I told you that I'd make a flat earth believer out of you.

PS It cannot be the Moon since you cannot explain the Allais effect at all: Allais performed all of the necessary calculations, the results were millions of times greater than the luni-solar component, a different heavenly body was passing in front of the Sun.

Repeating the same delusional BS wont help you.
Lying that you will magically make me a FEer wont help you.
Especially when you just repeat the same pathetic lies.

If you want to make me a FEer, do you know what you need to do? Stop repeating the same lies.
Every time you repeat the same refuted BS you just show how pathetic and desperate your position is.

If you want to make me a FEer, you can ditch all that BS about the radius of the universe being 31 km, as it clearly isn't.
Any other BS you present to try to prop up this clear BS just shows your desperation.

Again, the only way that 31 km radius of curvature is in any way meaningful is if the entire universe fits in a sphere with a radius of 31 km.

Likewise, if you want to make me a FEer, stop just repeating the same baseless BS, actually try to justify it.
And that is not just by linking to a paper and lying about what it says.

The calculations of Pauli stand correct: everyone knows that the radius of curvature is not the radius of a circle. His result is: if ether exists, then that radius of curvature measures 31 km.

Bell's theorem is the most direct proof of the existence of ether: it was even proven experimentally.

Pauli's result and Bell's theorem prove my assertions.

I told you that I'd make a flat earth believer out of you.

PS It cannot be the Moon since you cannot explain the Allais effect at all: Allais performed all of the necessary calculations, the results were millions of times greater than the luni-solar component, a different heavenly body was passing in front of the Sun.

Thank-you.

My faith in flat earthers was ebbing but you have fully restored my faith. If any body khan, sandokhan.

I guess I have to find out who Pauli is, how ether relates, how number 32 factors in, what Bell's theorum is, and the Allais effect.

Boy oh boy, do I have some flat earth homework ahead of me!

Quote from: sandokhan on December 24, 2023, 01:18:41 PM

The calculations of Pauli stand correct: everyone knows that the radius of curvature is not the radius of a circle. His result is: if ether exists, then that radius of curvature measures 31 km.

Bell's theorem is the most direct proof of the existence of ether: it was even proven experimentally.

Pauli's result and Bell's theorem prove my assertions.

I told you that I'd make a flat earth believer out of you.

PS It cannot be the Moon since you cannot explain the Allais effect at all: Allais performed all of the necessary calculations, the results were millions of times greater than the luni-solar component, a different heavenly body was passing in front of the Sun.

Thank-you.

My faith in flat earthers was ebbing but you have fully restored my faith. If any body khan, sandokhan.

I guess I have to find out who Pauli is, how ether relates, how number 32 factors in, what Bell's theorum is, and the Allais effect.

Boy oh boy, do I have some flat earth homework ahead of me!

I wouldn't bother, sandy has a history of misquoting scientific papers, well blatantly lying is more acurate.  He scans through,  cherrypicks things completely out of context, lies about anything in the same paper that clarifies or refutes his total twisting of said subject, posts pages upon pages of copy pasta, posts images of mathematical formula that have nothing to do with what he claims they are for, and generally is a joy to read and laugh at.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 24, 2023, 10:05:19 PM

Quote from: sandokhan on December 24, 2023, 01:18:41 PM

The calculations of Pauli stand correct: everyone knows that the radius of curvature is not the radius of a circle. His result is: if ether exists, then that radius of curvature measures 31 km.

Bell's theorem is the most direct proof of the existence of ether: it was even proven experimentally.

Pauli's result and Bell's theorem prove my assertions.

I told you that I'd make a flat earth believer out of you.

PS It cannot be the Moon since you cannot explain the Allais effect at all: Allais performed all of the necessary calculations, the results were millions of times greater than the luni-solar component, a different heavenly body was passing in front of the Sun.

Thank-you.

My faith in flat earthers was ebbing but you have fully restored my faith. If any body khan, sandokhan.

I guess I have to find out who Pauli is, how ether relates, how number 32 factors in, what Bell's theorum is, and the Allais effect.

Boy oh boy, do I have some flat earth homework ahead of me!

I wouldn't bother, sandy has a history of misquoting scientific papers, well blatantly lying is more acurate.  He scans through,  cherrypicks things completely out of context, lies about anything in the same paper that clarifies or refutes his total twisting of said subject, posts pages upon pages of copy pasta, posts images of mathematical formula that have nothing to do with what he claims they are for, and generally is a joy to read and laugh at.

He lives and breathes the flat earth motto, that's for sure! I quickly appraised myself of each of those people and the scientific concepts they introduced, and nothing is remotely related to flat Earth, as I naturally suspected. It wasn't a wasted ten minutes of my time.

Radius of curvature of the Universe: 31 kilometers



The calculation was carried out by Wolfgang Pauli, one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century.

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, 'the universe would not even reach to the moon'".

If the ether drift field (zero point energy, scalar waves) does exist, then the radius of curvature of the observable universe is 31 km.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

C. P. Enz, A. Thellung : Nullpunktenergie und Anordnung
nicht vertauschbarer Faktoren im Hamiltonoperator ,
Helv. Phys. Acta 33, 839–848 (1960) pg 842

https://academic.oup.com/astrogeo/article/53/1/1.24/218451

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0810.2213.pdf

Earlier, I stated that the upper bound of the distance to Sirius is less than 50 km:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1795032#msg1795032

"If the electromagnetic field would really have a non vanishing zero-point energy, the radius of the universe would then be 31 km."

This is precisely what happens in reality.

The distance from the center of the flat surface of the Earth to the top of the second dome is 31 km.




By the way... can you explain to your readers why those satellites do not register the orbital Sagnac effect?

Flat earth believers in a nutshell, turning their back on reality in favour of conjuring up any old nonsense in a deliberate attempt not to have to deal with hard facts of life.

Sandokhan can invent any old claptrap he wants but regardless of what it is the fact of the JWT is indisputable. As for the reality of satellites, just look up is all one needs to see the truth.

Sandokhan and his ilk are so delusional that they refuse to believe the laid on reality provided by their eyes in favour of the twisted belief driven nonsense they manufacture inside their heads. Their mantra of “anything but the truth” ringing constantly in their heads.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-611525eb-3a0c-4a68-bf54-485df138b6f6

Two years on and the JWT is providing real data to help provide answers to these big questions.

With the start of a new year will those flat earth types who have closed off their minds to the truth not stop and take a moment to reassess and question what they believe.

I hope for the sake of the world that all the potential Trump voters do this. For like flat earthers they too are unable to embrace either reality or the truth.