veryhot_post Author Topic: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything  (Read 6413 times)

Offline junker

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • junker's avatar
  • Posts: 1586
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #140 on: »
Einstein's EP applies only to a point, not a surface.

Incorrect.
I'm not qualified.

Offline Shmeggley

  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #141 on: »
I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Under the UA theory, the Earth is not moving at a constant velocity, it is accelerating at ~9.8m/s^2 which would have the same effect as gravity.  No one said it was moving at a constant velocity.
That, of course, is incorrect. On a RE, gravity has a detectable and expected radial nature. Einstein's EP applies only to a point, not a surface.
Quote from: http://aether.lbl.gov/www/science/equiv.html
At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems

Kind of funny that you go to a website about Aether to try to teach us FE'ers about gravity.  Ironic maybe?

Pretty funny how an FE'er will declare a website to be "about" a word that occurs nowhere on the site except in the URL.  ;D

Offline Shmeggley

  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #142 on: »
We needed another one of these threads, and the upper fora need more FET focused content.  Ask, and I shall endeavor to enlighten.

A long standing question I have that's never been answered sufficiently:

How does FET explain how stars appear to circle around a central point in the sky, in opposite directions depending whether you are North or South of the equator?

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 417
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #143 on: »
We needed another one of these threads, and the upper fora need more FET focused content.  Ask, and I shall endeavor to enlighten.

A long standing question I have that's never been answered sufficiently:

How does FET explain how stars appear to circle around a central point in the sky, in opposite directions depending whether you are North or South of the equator?
With respect for the question and effort in posing it, I offer the following replacement.

In both the "mono-pole" and "bi-pole" models of FET, please explain how every observer, not on either pole, simultaneously see the celestial objects, in general, rotate as though on a sphere with an axis co-linear with the RE axis; that is, in shorter circles from the Celestial Equator toward the both poles and around the nearer pole. The basic period of this rotation is 24 hours. The apparent motion of each object is at a constant speed, east to west.

To add evidence here are several links: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap071208.html
http://sguisard.astrosurf.com/Pagim/From_pole_to_pole.html
http://www.allthesky.com/various/trails24.html
http://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/ua/StarMotion.html

New attributed, reproducible evidence published today: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/06/19/time_lapse_planetary_panorama_by_vincent_brady.html
« Last Edit: by Gulliver »
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Offline Shmeggley

  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #144 on: »
We needed another one of these threads, and the upper fora need more FET focused content.  Ask, and I shall endeavor to enlighten.

A long standing question I have that's never been answered sufficiently:

How does FET explain how stars appear to circle around a central point in the sky, in opposite directions depending whether you are North or South of the equator?
With respect for the question and effort in posing it, I offer the following replacement.

In both the "mono-pole" and "bi-pole" models of FET, please explain how every observer, not on either pole, simultaneously see the celestial objects, in general, rotate as though on a sphere with an axis co-linear with the RE axis; that is, in shorter circles from the Celestial Equator toward the both poles and around the nearer pole. The basic period of this rotation is 24 hours. The apparent motion of each object is at a constant speed, east to west.

That's what I meant to say. :P

Offline Vauxhall

  • *
  • Ghost of V's avatar
  • Posts: 2270
  • reverse the polarity of the neutron flow
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #145 on: »
Welcome, Shmeggley. I see you've found another site to spout your round Earth propaganda.

How is that working out for you?
Read the FAQS.

Offline Shmeggley

  • *
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #146 on: »
Welcome, Shmeggley. I see you've found another site to spout your round Earth propaganda.

How is that working out for you?

Thanks, and I see you're spouting the same nonsense here as over there. ;)

It's kind of dead here right now in the upper fora so far as I can tell, but I haven't been here long. I kind of missed the whole schism event, as I took a break from FES for several months, right around the time the split started I guess.

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #147 on: »
The problem that Shmeggley, myself and the entire rest of the world is how in the world people in this day and age  can people say that they believe in a so-called "flat earth" ???

And reject science when the existence of this very website is based on the latest in science. ???

And it's not Round Earth "Propaganda" but simple truths and evidence that Shemeggley is presenting. And that you really know it but will just deny it  ???

Or is this just another website for debate by just a bunch of actors doing it just for the purpose of debate  ???

Questions:

1.How does this website view Samuel Birley Rowbotham and his works ?

2.How does this website view the "recovering the sinking passing over the horizon " idea ?
« Last Edit: by googleotomy »

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #148 on: »
Goodness, that is a question. The govt can fool the whole world into believing the world is round, but can't shut down a website? Right!

If people started taking us seriously they'd shut us down.

Not to worry . I don't know of any people who would take you seriously.
« Last Edit: by googleotomy »

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #149 on: »
Alex, greetings, & welcome to the weird & wacky. I can already see you're likely British, Australian, or NZ, & in the sciences or maths (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm English, living in the USA, Jewish, & in History. My particular study is Middle Ages & Renaissance England. I've recently moved beyond that to write a dissertation on Christopher Columbus. Introductions being done for my part, I'll give you some, shall we say, both scholarly & friendly advice about FEers. 1st, NEVER expect a straight answer to any ?. If they can't defend their 'theory', they will blame 'the conspiracy' or other such silliness. Their 1st dodge will be what Vaux just tried. 'Ask 1 ? @ a time.' He could easily have answered each ? in the order you gave them. I'm a REer, & NOT a scientist, so I can't begin to answer your ?s, but I can probably critique an FE answer for logic's sake. I look forward to following this thread.

I just discovered this "new flat earth society website" and I can't detect any difference from the "old" one. ??? ::)

Offline pizaaplanet

  • e
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • pizaaplanet's avatar
  • Posts: 2130
  • In e we trust
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #150 on: »
I just discovered this "new flat earth society website" and I can't detect any difference from the "old" one. ??? ::)
Hopefully I can be of assistance here. We offer:
  • A less broken forum (you can actually use the search and it won't crash the server!), with publicly-available code!
  • Proper spambot-prevention measures that don't randomly ban users for silly reasons like using a proxy
  • An active administration that cares™
  • Very frequent (by the minute) database backups, guaranteeing that we won't suddenly lose 6 weeks of posts, and allowing us to do things like restoring a thread that someone accidentally deleted
  • As few pointless restrictions on the users as possible. Want to rename your account? Go right ahead. Want to delete it? No problem. Want to post more frequently than once per 20 seconds? Why not (given that we took care of spambots)?
  • Very little downtime, and it's generally announced well in advance. I think our longest unannounced downtime was when I cocked up a thing and we ended up serving a blank page instead of the forum for 10 minutes.
  • No arbitrarily-forbidden words
  • Some minor enhancements like a spoiler tag, better Facebook integration, a public ban log, and the ignore function actually working in CN
  • Probably a lot of stuff I forgot about, generally falling under the categories of smooth user experience
Now, we do not consider ourselves to be anything other than the Flat Earth Society, so our mentality is pretty much identical between the sites (i.e. the Earth is still flat). Our strength compared to the old site is technical competency and more active management.
« Last Edit: by pizaaplanet »
To know that some RE'ers don't understand grade school physics look no further than:
Quote from: inquisitive
What is the value of the acceleration? [of the ISS towards the Earth]
Approximately: 9.8 m/s2

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #151 on: »
Thanks very much, pizzaplanet.

I certainly hope that  this "new" website will not sink to the depths of the "old" website with all the insults and vulgarity from both sides.

1. Does this Flat Earth Society have an accurate Flat Earth Map of the entire world without the obvious inaccurancies of distances and shapes  of the map that the other Flat Earth Society is showing ?

 (Which is in reality, just a copy of a North Polar, Unipolar or Equal Azimuth Projection of a globe.)
« Last Edit: by googleectomy »

Offline pizaaplanet

  • e
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • pizaaplanet's avatar
  • Posts: 2130
  • In e we trust
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #152 on: »
I certainly hope that  this "new" website will not sink to the depths of the "old" website with all the insults and vulgarity from both sides.
Well, you're doing a "great" job at trying to prevent that.
To know that some RE'ers don't understand grade school physics look no further than:
Quote from: inquisitive
What is the value of the acceleration? [of the ISS towards the Earth]
Approximately: 9.8 m/s2

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #153 on: »
Cheers and best wishes  :D   There are still several unanswered questions.
« Last Edit: by googleectomy »

googleotomy

  • Guest
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #154 on: »
im talking about the thousands upon thousands of photos

Fake.


hundreds of satellites and astronauts

Fake.

plus the thousands of space launches that have been achieved

Fake.

The usual FE response. Ho Hum. ::)

Offline Yamato

  • *
  • Yamato's avatar
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #155 on: »
We needed another one of these threads, and the upper fora need more FET focused content.  Ask, and I shall endeavor to enlighten.

A long standing question I have that's never been answered sufficiently:

How does FET explain how stars appear to circle around a central point in the sky, in opposite directions depending whether you are North or South of the equator?
With respect for the question and effort in posing it, I offer the following replacement.

In both the "mono-pole" and "bi-pole" models of FET, please explain how every observer, not on either pole, simultaneously see the celestial objects, in general, rotate as though on a sphere with an axis co-linear with the RE axis; that is, in shorter circles from the Celestial Equator toward the both poles and around the nearer pole. The basic period of this rotation is 24 hours. The apparent motion of each object is at a constant speed, east to west.

To add evidence here are several links: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap071208.html
http://sguisard.astrosurf.com/Pagim/From_pole_to_pole.html
http://www.allthesky.com/various/trails24.html
http://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/ua/StarMotion.html

New attributed, reproducible evidence published today: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/06/19/time_lapse_planetary_panorama_by_vincent_brady.html


There is no needed for any kind of complex theory or even checking NASA's website to note an important fact: if the Earth were a flat surface, everyone in the earth would see the exact same stars and constellations, but the fact is that people that is below/beyond the equator sees a completely different firmament than those above the equator.

I can ensure this is true since I was in both Earth hemispheres, and the stars are different, not only the distribution, but also the stars themselves.
This can only happen if the earth is a spheroid object OR in the case of a flat Earth, if I can travel to the opposite face of the surface, which, according to your non-proven theories, is physically impossible.

So, please, explain how this contradiction can happen in your flat earth model.

Thanks.

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 417
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #156 on: »
...if the Earth were a flat surface, everyone in the earth would see the exact same stars and constellations...
Sorry, but no.

FET also includes (the incredible) shortening of distances to the stars, etc. Consider that you can't see the same clouds right now that I can, and I think you'll see how they manage to make a bit a sense.

I hope that helps.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Offline Yamato

  • *
  • Yamato's avatar
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #157 on: »
...if the Earth were a flat surface, everyone in the earth would see the exact same stars and constellations...
Sorry, but no.

FET also includes (the incredible) shortening of distances to the stars, etc. Consider that you can't see the same clouds right now that I can, and I think you'll see how they manage to make a bit a sense.

I hope that helps.

Sorry, but yes.

If the earth is a plane, I would be able to see polaris with a telescope from anywhere in the surface, the same as I would be able to see the clouds in New York from Berlin with a telescope, excluding the obstruction of buildings and mountains, as well as the atmospheric distortion.

But from South Africa, I can't see polaris or any othe star in the northern hemisphere, according to my observations or anyone else's observations.

If the flat earth model proposed is a semi-spheroid over a flat ocean, then you are not talking about a flat earth, but rather a semi-round earth. In this case, all your model from its foundations loses its validity since you are applying plane theories and maths to a curved surface.

Also, given your argument that the distance to the stars noticeabely change, I must ask what method is used in the flat earth model to measure the distance to each star.

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 417
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #158 on: »
Sorry, but yes.

If the earth is a plane, I would be able to see polaris with a telescope from anywhere in the surface, the same as I would be able to see the clouds in New York from Berlin with a telescope, excluding the obstruction of buildings and mountains, as well as the atmospheric distortion.
FEers use both of those reasons to explain the limited view of the stars.
Quote
But from South Africa, I can't see polaris or any othe star in the northern hemisphere, according to my observations or anyone else's observations.
Many northern stars are visible from SA at 30o S.
Quote

If the flat earth model proposed is a semi-spheroid over a flat ocean, then you are not talking about a flat earth, but rather a semi-round earth. In this case, all your model from its foundations loses its validity since you are applying plane theories and maths to a curved surface.

Also, given your argument that the distance to the stars noticeabely change, I must ask what method is used in the flat earth model to measure the distance to each star.
It's not my argument,  but, yes, FEers do manage to post (and re-post) wildly inaccurate measurements of the distance to object in the sky. Please see my thread in Flat Earth General critiquing EnaG for an example of Rowbotham's botched attempt to measure the distance to the Sun.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Offline Yamato

  • *
  • Yamato's avatar
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Message Icon
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #159 on: »
Sorry, but yes.

If the earth is a plane, I would be able to see polaris with a telescope from anywhere in the surface, the same as I would be able to see the clouds in New York from Berlin with a telescope, excluding the obstruction of buildings and mountains, as well as the atmospheric distortion.
FEers use both of those reasons to explain the limited view of the stars.
[/quote]

With "obstruction of buildings and mountains" i was talking about "the obeserver being just next to a mountain or building", and with "atmospheric distortion" i was talking about "polluted areas or areas with poor seeing".

In either case, if the earth was flat, observing from the Everest would let us see all stars from the firmament.

Many northern stars are visible from SA at 30o S.

You can't see Polaris from Australia.
Of course you can see some constellations that are far away from the rotation axis, but not the closest ones.