[Wulf]

Einstein proved the Earth is flat.  Case closed.

How does mass warping space-time prove that the earth is flat? 

i mean seriously, nothing?

What part of "Case closed" do you not understand? 
[/quote

I understand it perfectly, it's just that if you close it now without giving any experimental evidence the only thing to conclude is that RET is the only option.

[Rushy]

Shine a laser across 3km of water and measure the curvature of the water's surface (the distance of the water from the laser at specific intervals).

[markjo]

Einstein proved the Earth is flat.  Case closed.

How does mass warping space-time prove that the earth is flat? 

i mean seriously, nothing?

What part of "Case closed" do you not understand? 

The part where it's relevant.

[Roundy]

This has been gone over many times.  Einstein's entire career was intended to prove the Earth is flat.  All of his work points that way.  The excitement to so radically challenge the conventions of science is the impetus that drove him out of that stuffy patent office and into the realm of academia.  Throughout his work from beginning to end it's clear that he was trying to prove the Earth is flat.  He always came just a step short of actually saying so because he realized that no matter how succinctly he proved his premiss, it would never be enough for the globularists who were so fanatically devoted to their beliefs.  But it's all there.  I want you to do something for me, markjo.  I want you to reread Einstein's entire body of work with the idea in mind that he was trying to prove the Earth is flat.  Go ahead and tell me it doesn't force you to look at his life's work in a new light.

[markjo]

This has been gone over many times.  Einstein's entire career was intended to prove the Earth is flat.  All of his work points that way. 

Hmm...  Maybe that's why he had so much trouble trying to unify gravity with the 3 other fundamental forces.

[Roundy]

This has been gone over many times.  Einstein's entire career was intended to prove the Earth is flat.  All of his work points that way. 

Hmm...  Maybe that's why he had so much trouble trying to unify gravity with the 3 other fundamental forces.

Why?

[markjo]

This has been gone over many times.  Einstein's entire career was intended to prove the Earth is flat.  All of his work points that way. 

Hmm...  Maybe that's why he had so much trouble trying to unify gravity with the 3 other fundamental forces.

Why?

Because gravity kept wanting to make the earth round.

[Wulf]

Shine a laser across 3km of water and measure the curvature of the water's surface (the distance of the water from the laser at specific intervals).

have you done this? it'd be a good idea not to assume the earth is a perfect sphere because according to RE it isn't. Even the water isn't completely round.

This has been gone over many times.  Einstein's entire career was intended to prove the Earth is flat.  All of his work points that way.  The excitement to so radically challenge the conventions of science is the impetus that drove him out of that stuffy patent office and into the realm of academia.  Throughout his work from beginning to end it's clear that he was trying to prove the Earth is flat.  He always came just a step short of actually saying so because he realized that no matter how succinctly he proved his premiss, it would never be enough for the globularists who were so fanatically devoted to their beliefs.  But it's all there.  I want you to do something for me, markjo.  I want you to reread Einstein's entire body of work with the idea in mind that he was trying to prove the Earth is flat.  Go ahead and tell me it doesn't force you to look at his life's work in a new light.

the mind has a tricky way of making evidence fit a pre-existing viewpoint. perhaps it would be better for you to list some examples that we can discuss.

[Rushy]

have you done this? it'd be a good idea not to assume the earth is a perfect sphere because according to RE it isn't. Even the water isn't completely round.

It is a simple experiment and if you're interested in evidence then I don't see why acquiring some for yourself would be out of the question. It can theoretically be done on any size body of water, since any amount of water on a planet should show some modicum of curvature, no matter how big or small the body is and regardless of whether it is a perfect sphere or not.

As an additional fun fact many archaeologists theorized that the Egyptians used water to aid in their building of the pyramids, as water allowed for a perfect level surface for them to measure against. This wouldn't be possible on a spheroid of any nature.

[Wulf]

have you done this? it'd be a good idea not to assume the earth is a perfect sphere because according to RE it isn't. Even the water isn't completely round.

It is a simple experiment and if you're interested in evidence then I don't see why acquiring some for yourself would be out of the question. It can theoretically be done on any size body of water, since any amount of water on a planet should show some modicum of curvature, no matter how big or small the body is and regardless of whether it is a perfect sphere or not.

As an additional fun fact many archaeologists theorized that the Egyptians used water to aid in their building of the pyramids, as water allowed for a perfect level surface for them to measure against. This wouldn't be possible on a spheroid of any nature.

Unfortunately i don't have the ability to test this. My current living status won't allow for it not just because of lack of money but because of lack of time.(i'm in college right now.) I would love to do it sometime in the future, though.

i was under the impression that there were FE scientists that have conducted experiments that show that the earth is round. if this is not one of them than i fail to see why it was brought up.

as for the Egyptians clever use of water: can you see single celled organisms without a microscope? I think you underestimate how big the earth is under RE theory. any curvature on this scale wouldn't be visible to the naked eye and would be too small to matter in the construction of buildings.

[Rushy]

Unfortunately i don't have the ability to test this. My current living status won't allow for it not just because of lack of money but because of lack of time.(i'm in college right now.) I would love to do it sometime in the future, though.

That's unfortunate, but understandable.

i was under the impression that there were FE scientists that have conducted experiments that show that the earth is round. if this is not one of them than i fail to see why it was brought up.

If I were to throw links and books at you, would you even believe them? Would you know how trustworthy it was? Why take something from other's when it is better to see for yourself?

If you want to know, it is based on the Bedford Level Experiment, which I did myself because some people claimed it showed the earth was round and some flat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment

as for the Egyptians clever use of water: can you see single celled organisms without a microscope? I think you underestimate how big the earth is under RE theory. any curvature on this scale wouldn't be visible to the naked eye and would be too small to matter in the construction of buildings.

I think you underestimate how big the pyramids are. Regardless, I did the math, why don't you? No need for conjecture at this point.

[Wulf]

I think you underestimate how big the pyramids are. Regardless, I did the math, why don't you? No need for conjecture at this point.

sure. I am, of course, assuming the earth is a perfect sphere and not oblate with varying bumps.

because a^2 +b^2 = c^2 with a being the 755.9 ft span of the pyramid in question(Giza) and b being the radius of the earth spanning 20,925,524.9 feet.

a^2 = 57384.1 feet
b^2 = 437,877,592,340,520.01 feet

a^2+b^2= c^2 = 437877592397904.11 feet

c= the square root of 437877592397904.11= 20925524.90137
c-a= the drop due to the curvature of the earth = 0.00137 feet.

this equates to .418 mm in drop. The smallest items visible to the naked eye are between .1-.3mm in size, so the ability to notice a .4mm drop across 755.9 feet is close to impossible to notice without a tool. this distance would not affect the construction of a building.

if i did anything wrong let me know. seriously.

[Ghost of V]

if i did anything wrong let me know. seriously.

It's the first portion of your post, that's where you did something wrong. You can't assume the Earth is a sphere then work backwards from that. That's not science.

[Wulf]

i was under the impression that there were FE scientists that have conducted experiments that show that the earth is round. if this is not one of them than i fail to see why it was brought up.

If I were to throw links and books at you, would you even believe them? Would you know how trustworthy it was? Why take something from other's when it is better to see for yourself?

If you want to know, it is based on the Bedford Level Experiment, which I did myself because some people claimed it showed the earth was round and some flat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment

thanks, I'm looking into the Bedford_level_experiment now, but accord to my search results there are varying results. without knowing the methodology that differed between results i cannot say what made the difference. I wish i owned a Theodolite so i could test this myself. if you ever get the chance you should video tape the experiment, or take detailed notes of your methodology.

it's not that i wouldn't believe whatever you say, it's that i think the most likely explanation for why people believe in FE is because of both the lack of proper understanding on the subject and incorrect methodology. Me doing this gives me the opportunity to remain objective about a subject in which bias most certainly exists. It's completely conceivable that i will reach a point where i can't continue due to lack of professional knowledge on the subject.

if i did anything wrong let me know. seriously.

It's the first portion of your post, that's where you did something wrong. You can't assume the Earth is a sphere then work backwards from that. That's not science.

true, but i have no idea what the earths actual shape is at that location. I was assuming that the math Irushwithscvs was doing made that same assumption. if Irushwithscvs didn't do that then i would be willing to redo the math if they provide the information i lack. i imagine the actual shape of the earth wouldn't help much anyway since the Egyptians likely scouted for a flat area to start construction, but i may be wrong on that.

[Wulf]

sorry. the nature of curving water depends on the gravity in that area and how much mass is there. that later part about the Egyptians finding a flat area is not relevant.

[markjo]

if i did anything wrong let me know. seriously.

It's the first portion of your post, that's where you did something wrong. You can't assume the Earth is a sphere then work backwards from that. That's not science.

Actually, you can and it is.  It's called formulating a hypothesis and then testing it with an experiment that will tell you whether or not  your hypothesis is supported.

[Rushy]

sure. I am, of course, assuming the earth is a perfect sphere and not oblate with varying bumps.

because a^2 +b^2 = c^2 with a being the 755.9 ft span of the pyramid in question(Giza) and b being the radius of the earth spanning 20,925,524.9 feet.

a^2 = 57384.1 feet
b^2 = 437,877,592,340,520.01 feet

a^2+b^2= c^2 = 437877592397904.11 feet

c= the square root of 437877592397904.11= 20925524.90137
c-a= the drop due to the curvature of the earth = 0.00137 feet.

this equates to .418 mm in drop. The smallest items visible to the naked eye are between .1-.3mm in size, so the ability to notice a .4mm drop across 755.9 feet is close to impossible to notice without a tool. this distance would not affect the construction of a building.

if i did anything wrong let me know. seriously.

If you trust that you are correct then you have the correct answer.

[Tom Bishop]

"Common sense is what tells us the earth is flat." -- Albert Einstein

[Rama Set]

"Common sense is what tells us the earth is flat." -- Albert Einstein

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."

Albert Einstein


So a prejudice acquired by age eighteen is what tells us the Earth is flat. So sayeth the Einstein.

[Thork]

"Common sense is what tells us the earth is flat." -- Albert Einstein

That quote is from Stuart Chase and falsely attributed to Einstien.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."
Albert Einstein

And your quote is attributed to Einstein by Eric Temple Bell and there isn't really any proof Einstein said that either.


"94% of all Albert Einstein quotes are falsely attributed to me." - Albert Einstein.