SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #80 on: April 29, 2023, 06:41:10 PM »

You can buy very accurate scales. A more portable one is going to compromise the precision but it is going to be able to resolve up to 0.001 g +/- whatever. I don't know how much of a difference temperature & humidity can make but you can create a microclimate if that's a big concern. As far as air buoyancy, you can calculate that and take that into account or you can build a small vacuum chamber.

Well, indeed - so get out there and do it, if you don't find the multitude of scientific papers, that show a wide range of experiments that all align despite using different methods, convincing. One point of note - poor terminology on my part - I said 'scales / balance' earlier. That's not right - you definitely want scales, and not a balance, as a balance will compensate for gravity error. You want scales, and you want to make sure you don't calibrate them after moving - clearly using a reference mass for calibration will remove the tiny error that you are deliberately trying to measure. You'd also need to make sure the the scales were perfectly level at each location.

I don't think you'd need to go to the effort of a vacuum chamber - air pressure does not change that much, as long as you are at roughly the same elevation, and you would need a very large change to see much of a buoyancy difference.

But ultimately what you are describing is essentially the Kern gnome experiment - admittedly a bit of scientific fun (as the real science has moved way, way past this level) - albeit changed to an altitude perspective rather than a latitude.

Sorry, but were you saying that if the gyroscope tells you you're flying level, that means that you're flying along a curved path because you're assuming the Earth to be a globe and level means curved? If so, I have nothing else to say to you to put it mildly.

Aviation gyro behaviour is very compelling evidence for a round earth. I'm not sure you've understood what is being discussed here. A traditional mechanical gyro will hold its attitude regardless of what goes on around it - that is why there are so useful in aviation, for both attitude referencing and other functions like turn indicators (a 'rate gyro') and heading referencing. Taking the attitude example, we take a full freedom gyro, attach it to a system of indication and use it to tell the pilot which way is up. This is great, but it is subject to a number of errors. Transport errors, for example, are where you take a gyro that is indicating level and move it to some other place on the earth. It will, without correction, retain its original orientation, meaning it will progressively indicate pitch or bank errors. The solution to this is to have a system that exploits the fact that pilots generally either use bank angles above 5 degrees, or will try to not bank at all - very small bank angles are unusual. So gyro systems are designed to have a function whereby at small (ie <5 degrees) bank angles, the system is assumed to be level, and is subject to a small gravity correction, which means it retains level as it moves around the globe. This is inhibited above 5 degrees, providing precision during manoeuvring.

There is a similar issue with heading referencing systems, which are subject to errors caused by the earth's rotation. Simple systems have a 'drift nut', which is preset during maintenance to the aircraft's local latitude - this provides a correcting precession to the system, counteracting the earth's rotation. On more advanced systems, there is usually a pilot-controlled dial to set the local latitude.

All of these errors are also present in ring-laser 'gyro' systems - these aren't really gyros at all, but rather sense rotation in all three axes - and similar compensations have to be applied for transport topple and drift as well as rotation errors.

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #81 on: April 29, 2023, 06:46:19 PM »

It's a good thing that we have this master chef tossing a word salad like no other to clear everything up...

I concluded two things:

- he thinks the world is round
- I haven't the faintest idea what he's on about with the other stuff

He's clearly been accused of word salading before. His riposte is interesting, as he focusses on the specific definitions of each word, and ridicules those who might not know them. He ignores, of course, the fact that a word salad is, by definition, composed of valid words. It's the selection and order that is the issue. That doesn't make him wrong - indeed he may well have some interesting ideas - but he simply doesn't make any sense half the time, as your transcript neatly illustrates.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #82 on: April 29, 2023, 07:34:24 PM »
You are certainly getting off the original subject but since you are the OP of this thread, I will supply you with an answer.   
An airplane or a ship can show that they are transitioning along a curved path by using a gyroscope.  I am personally familiar with this technology and had the manufacturers manuals and service equipment that provided me with finer and more detailed measurements than my eye could discern.  Since the earth is also spinning on an axis you would have to take all the x, y and z measurements at a fixed time, like at noon (UTC) each day.  When you did this after a trip halfway around the earth, as I have done countless times, you could see that you are now standing on your head relative to the way you were when you started your long journey. 


Like Johannes Kepler said:
 The chief aim of all investigations of the external world
 should be to discover the rational order and harmony
 which has been imposed on it by God and which He revealed
 to us in the language of mathematics.

Nope. Gravity is making the gyroscope do that, not them going along an imaginary curved path. It's your problem if you refuse to understand what gravity is and the reality of our Earth.


You claim that you care about physics and natural science but really what you care about is formal science and mathematical physics. Have a good whatever it is wherever you are on our level Earth.
Nope.
Gyroscopes work on the principles of gyroscopic inertia.  They will work fine whether there's gravity present or not.  Mathematics shows this to be true.
 
Immanuel Kant said:  In any particular theory there is only as much real science as there is mathematics.

Sorry, but were you saying that if the gyroscope tells you you're flying level, that means that you're flying along a curved path because you're assuming the Earth to be a globe and level means curved? If so, I have nothing else to say to you to put it mildly.
In an airplane the altimeter’s function is to measure the distance above the surface of the earth along the route.  On a spherical earth when you maintain a constant altitude between two points you do fly a curved flight path.  You never notice that because the changes are so small relative to the forward distance you are traveling.  It’s not unusual for your altimeter to bounce up and down by a couple hundred feet all along the way while the autopilot compensates to maintain a set altitude.  A gyroscope, on the other hand, will always point at a fixed reference point in space.  When it’s mounted in an aircraft you would see a constant change in the Z axis as you progress along your route.  If you could set your autopilot to maintain a particular constant Z axis value, then you would see a continuous increase in altitude as you progressed along your route.  If the earth was flat, then flying along a constant Z axis would also mean flying at a constant altitude over the earth’s surface.  My measurements indicated a curved surface because of the consistent changes in the Z axis measurements in the direction of travel that were consistently reversed when the reverse journey was made back to the original point of departure.  All I know is that this is what I witnessed over countless trips using many different gyros.

You can't be serious. If the globe model was true and you had a theoretical gyroscope that didn't get affected by external forces (which can't happen in reality), it would not drift at all. Because in the globe model curved = level.


Gravity:



It's a good thing that we have this master chef tossing a word salad like no other to clear everything up...

"Gravity describes the motion of charge. Gravity is the field of counter space. So what's the field of counter space? Well the field of counter space is hyperboloidal observed phenomena that we conventionally call gravity. Explained by the field of counter space - Magnetism is of course reciprocally the field of generating space so we have charge and discharge capacitance. 

And what's the inverse of capacitance? What's the release of capacitance? Well magnetism is the three-dimensional force-vector which is of course the force-vector of the taurus or a doughnut, if you will, and of course the volume of that donut is the generation of creation of space. Space is the negative image of pure potential or of charge. What's the opposite of charge? Everybody should know this but nobody was taught this stuff in high school or college. I wasn't either, but i knew fundamentally that none of these people knew anything and were supposedly my teachers.

I started off with the great advantage and knowing these people didn't know what they were talking about and then I worked back from there. So we have energy or increasing energy and then discharge of energy or decreasing energy. And you say acceleration and of course any time any book is said, and there are many countless books of science that refer to gravity as a force. Gravity is not only not a force it's the complete opposite of a force."


Accusing someone of word salad means what besides being a fallacious pseudo-argument? You could say that about Einstein, Hawking, Planck or anyone that you probably hold in high regard. All rationalists use word salad.


Sorry, but were you saying that if the gyroscope tells you you're flying level, that means that you're flying along a curved path because you're assuming the Earth to be a globe and level means curved? If so, I have nothing else to say to you to put it mildly.

Aviation gyro behaviour is very compelling evidence for a round earth. I'm not sure you've understood what is being discussed here. A traditional mechanical gyro will hold its attitude regardless of what goes on around it - that is why there are so useful in aviation, for both attitude referencing and other functions like turn indicators (a 'rate gyro') and heading referencing. Taking the attitude example, we take a full freedom gyro, attach it to a system of indication and use it to tell the pilot which way is up. This is great, but it is subject to a number of errors. Transport errors, for example, are where you take a gyro that is indicating level and move it to some other place on the earth. It will, without correction, retain its original orientation, meaning it will progressively indicate pitch or bank errors. The solution to this is to have a system that exploits the fact that pilots generally either use bank angles above 5 degrees, or will try to not bank at all - very small bank angles are unusual. So gyro systems are designed to have a function whereby at small (ie <5 degrees) bank angles, the system is assumed to be level, and is subject to a small gravity correction, which means it retains level as it moves around the globe. This is inhibited above 5 degrees, providing precision during manoeuvring.

There is a similar issue with heading referencing systems, which are subject to errors caused by the earth's rotation. Simple systems have a 'drift nut', which is preset during maintenance to the aircraft's local latitude - this provides a correcting precession to the system, counteracting the earth's rotation. On more advanced systems, there is usually a pilot-controlled dial to set the local latitude.

All of these errors are also present in ring-laser 'gyro' systems - these aren't really gyros at all, but rather sense rotation in all three axes - and similar compensations have to be applied for transport topple and drift as well as rotation errors.

I don't know what all that means... to me it looks like you're pasting that from some textbook or something. Why not address the original question instead?



It's a good thing that we have this master chef tossing a word salad like no other to clear everything up...

I concluded two things:

- he thinks the world is round
- I haven't the faintest idea what he's on about with the other stuff

He's clearly been accused of word salading before. His riposte is interesting, as he focusses on the specific definitions of each word, and ridicules those who might not know them. He ignores, of course, the fact that a word salad is, by definition, composed of valid words. It's the selection and order that is the issue. That doesn't make him wrong - indeed he may well have some interesting ideas - but he simply doesn't make any sense half the time, as your transcript neatly illustrates.

Your ad hominem is equally as meaningless as the word salad pseudo-argument.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2023, 07:39:11 PM by Dual1ty »

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #83 on: April 29, 2023, 08:38:02 PM »
Your ad hominem is equally as meaningless as the word salad pseudo-argument.

At least I'm not pretending that my observation is meaningful. Unlike this guy who seems to think stringing together a bunch synaptic flatulence is....

You can't count the number of accelerating unicorns underneath your bed because there are no such things as unicorns - In fact, there is no bed underneath which unicorns could be, let alone at a pace greater than a standstill, which there couldn't be, as previously stated, even if the bed existed in a non-duality counter space, degaussing the taurus orifice's inverse negative charge capacitance through which the hyperboloidal phenomenological force-vector wave action tugs across the construct known to clock-watchers as 'time'.

But hey, if you find this guy even remotely relevant, then, well, good luck with that.

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #84 on: April 29, 2023, 09:11:37 PM »
Gravity:




The guy in the video is Theoria Apophasis, also known as The Angry Photographer, also known as Ken Wheeler. His YouTube channel is https://www.youtube.com/@kathodosdotcom.

I make no comment on his channel, videos or knowledge – this is only for information. You can make your own assessment of his opinions.
Once again - you assume that the centre of the video is the centre of the camera's frame. We know that this isn't the case.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #85 on: April 29, 2023, 10:33:15 PM »
Your ad hominem is equally as meaningless as the word salad pseudo-argument.

At least I'm not pretending that my observation is meaningful. Unlike this guy who seems to think stringing together a bunch synaptic flatulence is....

You can't count the number of accelerating unicorns underneath your bed because there are no such things as unicorns - In fact, there is no bed underneath which unicorns could be, let alone at a pace greater than a standstill, which there couldn't be, as previously stated, even if the bed existed in a non-duality counter space, degaussing the taurus orifice's inverse negative charge capacitance through which the hyperboloidal phenomenological force-vector wave action tugs across the construct known to clock-watchers as 'time'.

But hey, if you find this guy even remotely relevant, then, well, good luck with that.

"At least I'm not pretending that my observation is meaningful.". I have no clue what you mean by that.

I don't remember that quote from the video. Where does he say that exactly?

Regardless if that's a real quote or not, he has his own way of saying things and I agree that it's word salad, but that's not a valid argument (well, maybe to you personally it is, which is fine and also irrelevant) to dismiss what he talks about or the experiments he did (he has many experiments on his channel, it's not just videos of him chatting). He's a bit of an oddball, but he is a globe believer after all.

He's also a self-made millionaire, by the way... Since you want to attack him, maybe it turns out that he's more interesting and successful than you. Just saying.

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #86 on: April 29, 2023, 10:39:03 PM »
I don't know what all that means

Indeed.


... to me it looks like you're pasting that from some textbook or something.


Well, it happens to be something I know about. It’s not pasted directly from a textbook, but you can certainly find it there, or indeed in numerous online sources. In any case…why should that matter? If it was copied from a textbook, wouldn’t that be better? Wouldn’t the fact that every airliner flying today employs technology that has specific compensation for the round shape of the earth give you pause for thought that maybe your idea that it’s flat is perhaps incorrect?

Why not address the original question instead?

The question about g varying with height? I have done that - I’ve given you explanations, papers and ideas. I’m not sure what else you want. I’m talking about gyros because you’ve been discussing them.

Your ad hominem is equally as meaningless as the word salad pseudo-argument.

It’s not ad hominem. I’m criticising him, yes, but I’m not going at his argument because of who he is, or what qualifications he has. And word salad isn’t a pseudo argument. He appears, at times, to be stringing together a series of words that sound impressive to the uninitiated, but which on inspection simply do not make sense. It’s like integrating across the transverse Laplace meta-space. Unless your eigenvalues are conjugate, there cannot be any rational value for beta. Any idiot knows this.

Read the transcript posted here - try to understand gravity, from first principles, according to him. It’s just circular - it doesn’t make coherent sense at all. And that’s being generous.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #87 on: April 29, 2023, 10:57:11 PM »
I don't know what all that means

Indeed.

- I haven't the faintest idea what he's on about with the other stuff

Indeed x2. Except what he talks about is way more relevant and meaningful that your delusion that a gyroscope somehow proves that we live on an absurdity.

Well, it happens to be something I know about. It’s not pasted directly from a textbook, but you can certainly find it there, or indeed in numerous online sources. In any case…why should that matter? If it was copied from a textbook, wouldn’t that be better? Wouldn’t the fact that every airliner flying today employs technology that has specific compensation for the round shape of the earth give you pause for thought that maybe your idea that it’s flat is perhaps incorrect?

No, I know the Earth is flat. But the way I got to that conclusion has nothing to do with gyroscopes. It's mostly globe believers like you who have to constantly try to make false associations between unrelated things and think that said ficticious associations prove your assumptions about the world correct.

The question about g varying with height? I have done that - I’ve given you explanations, papers and ideas. I’m not sure what else you want. I’m talking about gyros because you’ve been discussing them.

No, not that. I was asking how do your prove that a plane is really flying along curved a path if it's flying at the same altitude and how do you prove that "antipodal things" exist in the real world other than at the circus.

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #88 on: April 29, 2023, 11:09:04 PM »
[
No, not that. I was asking how do your prove that a plane is really flying along curved a path if it's flying at the same altitude and how do you prove that "antipodal things" exist in the real world other than at the circus.

Ah, I see. Well, ok then, let’s talk some more about aircraft.

I’ve described how aircraft gyro instruments are corrected for the transport errors, for example. You indicated that you don’t understand it, and that’s fine, but you must either:

- believe that I’m correct, and that aircraft attitude referencing systems, for example, are corrected for the round shape of the earth, or:

- believe that I’m wrong, and that they aren’t.

If you think I’m wrong, then you are also disagreeing with an entire industry / profession. Are they all wrong too? Do people spend entire careers teaching this stuff, and designing systems around it, and adjusting or fixing them, but everybody is lying?

If you think I’m right, then what is actually going on? We have systems, like heading systems with drift correction, where the error correction would actually induce errors if it wasn’t for the earths rotation…so we’d notice pretty quick if it wasn’t a rotating ball.

So what, exactly, are you suggesting is going on?

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #89 on: April 30, 2023, 12:53:22 AM »
Your ad hominem is equally as meaningless as the word salad pseudo-argument.

At least I'm not pretending that my observation is meaningful. Unlike this guy who seems to think stringing together a bunch synaptic flatulence is....

You can't count the number of accelerating unicorns underneath your bed because there are no such things as unicorns - In fact, there is no bed underneath which unicorns could be, let alone at a pace greater than a standstill, which there couldn't be, as previously stated, even if the bed existed in a non-duality counter space, degaussing the taurus orifice's inverse negative charge capacitance through which the hyperboloidal phenomenological force-vector wave action tugs across the construct known to clock-watchers as 'time'.

But hey, if you find this guy even remotely relevant, then, well, good luck with that.

"At least I'm not pretending that my observation is meaningful.". I have no clue what you mean by that.

I don't remember that quote from the video. Where does he say that exactly?

Regardless if that's a real quote or not, he has his own way of saying things and I agree that it's word salad, but that's not a valid argument (well, maybe to you personally it is, which is fine and also irrelevant) to dismiss what he talks about or the experiments he did (he has many experiments on his channel, it's not just videos of him chatting). He's a bit of an oddball, but he is a globe believer after all.

What experiments? Many? I'm having a hard time finding one.

He's also a self-made millionaire, by the way... Since you want to attack him, maybe it turns out that he's more interesting and successful than you. Just saying.

How do you know that he is a self-made millionaire? And why would that be relevant to gravity or gyroscopes or magnetism?

I don't know what all that means

Indeed.

- I haven't the faintest idea what he's on about with the other stuff

Indeed x2. Except what he talks about is way more relevant and meaningful that your delusion that a gyroscope somehow proves that we live on an absurdity.

If you have no idea what he is on about, how would you know what he is saying is more meaningful and relevant than anything else?

And if you don't know what he is talking about, what's the purpose of posting his videos? Just saying.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #90 on: April 30, 2023, 10:16:42 AM »
[
No, not that. I was asking how do your prove that a plane is really flying along curved a path if it's flying at the same altitude and how do you prove that "antipodal things" exist in the real world other than at the circus.

Ah, I see. Well, ok then, let’s talk some more about aircraft.

I’ve described how aircraft gyro instruments are corrected for the transport errors, for example. You indicated that you don’t understand it, and that’s fine, but you must either:

- believe that I’m correct, and that aircraft attitude referencing systems, for example, are corrected for the round shape of the earth, or:

- believe that I’m wrong, and that they aren’t.

If you think I’m wrong, then you are also disagreeing with an entire industry / profession. Are they all wrong too? Do people spend entire careers teaching this stuff, and designing systems around it, and adjusting or fixing them, but everybody is lying?

If you think I’m right, then what is actually going on? We have systems, like heading systems with drift correction, where the error correction would actually induce errors if it wasn’t for the earths rotation…so we’d notice pretty quick if it wasn’t a rotating ball.

So what, exactly, are you suggesting is going on?

I must? I must do nothing except laugh! People ardently believing that the world is a spinning ball is actually hilarious when you think about it. The entire cosmology that goes with it is hilarious.







« Last Edit: April 30, 2023, 10:27:55 AM by Dual1ty »

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #91 on: April 30, 2023, 10:30:42 AM »
I must? I must do nothing except laugh! People ardently believing that the world is a spinning ball is actually hilarious when you think about it. The entire cosmology that goes with it is hilarious.

This is a debating forum. We clearly disagree with each other, or else we wouldn’t be talking. But you aren’t debating. Of course you find my viewpoint ridiculous. That goes without saying. But if you don’t actually address the point being made, it just makes it look like you don’t actually have an argument.

Yes, you must either agree that gyro systems are as I say they are, or you instead must disagree. Because you aren’t making your view known it’s very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

Could you clarify what exactly you think is happening, for example, in an aircraft’s attitude and heading indicating systems when it flies around? Why do we have latitude-specific compensation for the earths rotation if the earth is isn’t rotating?

[edited to fix a typo]
« Last Edit: April 30, 2023, 10:52:15 AM by SteelyBob »

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #92 on: April 30, 2023, 10:53:12 AM »
I must? I must do nothing except laugh! People ardently believing that the world is a spinning ball is actually hilarious when you think about it. The entire cosmology that goes with it is hilarious.

This is a debating forum. We clearly disagree with each other, or else we wouldn’t be talking. But you aren’t debating. Of course you find my viewpoint ridiculous. That goes without saying. But if you don’t actually address the point being made, it just makes it look like you don’t actually have an argument.

Yes, you must either agree that gyro systems are as I say they are, or you instead must disagree. Because you sent making your view known it’s very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

Could you clarify what exactly you think is happening, for example, in an aircraft’s attitude and heading indicating systems when it flies around? Why do we have latitude-specific compensation for the earths rotation if the earth is isn’t rotating?

You're forgetting that objective reality is not debatable. Therefore you can only discuss things, and that's not the same as a game of football where you have two teams who must score goals against each other.

Gyroscopes aren't part of my reality and I don't know much about them, so why would I talk about them? Why don't you discuss that with other flat-earthers who know about them, in a separate thread dedicated to that topic?
« Last Edit: April 30, 2023, 11:00:49 AM by Dual1ty »

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #93 on: April 30, 2023, 11:00:50 AM »
I must? I must do nothing except laugh! People ardently believing that the world is a spinning ball is actually hilarious when you think about it. The entire cosmology that goes with it is hilarious.

This is a debating forum. We clearly disagree with each other, or else we wouldn’t be talking. But you aren’t debating. Of course you find my viewpoint ridiculous. That goes without saying. But if you don’t actually address the point being made, it just makes it look like you don’t actually have an argument.

Yes, you must either agree that gyro systems are as I say they are, or you instead must disagree. Because you sent making your view known it’s very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

Could you clarify what exactly you think is happening, for example, in an aircraft’s attitude and heading indicating systems when it flies around? Why do we have latitude-specific compensation for the earths rotation if the earth is isn’t rotating?

You're forgetting that objective reality is not debatable. Therefore you can only discuss things, and that's not the same as a game of football where you have two teams who have to score goals against each other.

Gyroscopes aren't part of my reality and I don't know much about them, so why would I talk about them? Why don't you discuss that with other flat-earthers who know about them, in a separate thread dedicated to that topic?

Well, I’m mainly talking about them because you said:

Quote
I was asking how do your prove that a plane is really flying along curved a path if it's flying at the same altitude

So I was trying to show you how, if you dig a little deeper, the shape of the earth is a fundamental part of the design of the systems that keep you safe when you fly. If you don’t understand that, that’s fine, but you therefore cannot be in a position to dismiss or ridicule those arguments - you’ve just admitted that you don’t understand them.

Very happy to switch back to your original point, although I think we’re done, aren’t we? You asked for some experiments, we showed you some stuff, and you’ve now understood what kit you would need if you wanted to try it yourself - assuming you don’t trust the large amount of mutually supporting data and research that’s already out there. I’m still not clear what you think gravity is, but that’s ok.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #94 on: April 30, 2023, 11:13:51 AM »
I must? I must do nothing except laugh! People ardently believing that the world is a spinning ball is actually hilarious when you think about it. The entire cosmology that goes with it is hilarious.

This is a debating forum. We clearly disagree with each other, or else we wouldn’t be talking. But you aren’t debating. Of course you find my viewpoint ridiculous. That goes without saying. But if you don’t actually address the point being made, it just makes it look like you don’t actually have an argument.

Yes, you must either agree that gyro systems are as I say they are, or you instead must disagree. Because you sent making your view known it’s very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

Could you clarify what exactly you think is happening, for example, in an aircraft’s attitude and heading indicating systems when it flies around? Why do we have latitude-specific compensation for the earths rotation if the earth is isn’t rotating?

You're forgetting that objective reality is not debatable. Therefore you can only discuss things, and that's not the same as a game of football where you have two teams who have to score goals against each other.

Gyroscopes aren't part of my reality and I don't know much about them, so why would I talk about them? Why don't you discuss that with other flat-earthers who know about them, in a separate thread dedicated to that topic?

Well, I’m mainly talking about them because you said:

Quote
I was asking how do your prove that a plane is really flying along curved a path if it's flying at the same altitude

So I was trying to show you how, if you dig a little deeper, the shape of the earth is a fundamental part of the design of the systems that keep you safe when you fly. If you don’t understand that, that’s fine, but you therefore cannot be in a position to dismiss or ridicule those arguments - you’ve just admitted that you don’t understand them.

It was the other dude who brought gyroscopes into the conversation, not me. He said:

In an airplane the altimeter’s function is to measure the distance above the surface of the earth along the route.  On a spherical earth when you maintain a constant altitude between two points you do fly a curved flight path.  You never notice that because the changes are so small relative to the forward distance you are traveling.  It’s not unusual for your altimeter to bounce up and down by a couple hundred feet all along the way while the autopilot compensates to maintain a set altitude.  A gyroscope, on the other hand, will always point at a fixed reference point in space.  When it’s mounted in an aircraft you would see a constant change in the Z axis as you progress along your route.  If you could set your autopilot to maintain a particular constant Z axis value, then you would see a continuous increase in altitude as you progressed along your route.  If the earth was flat, then flying along a constant Z axis would also mean flying at a constant altitude over the earth’s surface.  My measurements indicated a curved surface because of the consistent changes in the Z axis measurements in the direction of travel that were consistently reversed when the reverse journey was made back to the original point of departure.  All I know is that this is what I witnessed over countless trips using many different gyros.

My reply to that was:

You can't be serious. If the globe model was true and you had a theoretical gyroscope that didn't get affected by external forces (which can't happen in reality), it would not drift at all. Because in the globe model curved = level.

You didn't say that was wrong. How is that wrong?

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #95 on: April 30, 2023, 01:05:19 PM »
[

You can't be serious. If the globe model was true and you had a theoretical gyroscope that didn't get affected by external forces (which can't happen in reality), it would not drift at all. Because in the globe model curved = level.

You didn't say that was wrong. How is that wrong?

Ok…we’re back talking about gyros again.

You actually weren’t really wrong. I’d slightly challenge you on the curved=level bit, as that’s not how we define level, but I think I get what you mean. But your broader point is correct - if you take a full freedom gyro and move it around the world it will keep pointing to a fixed point in space, so yes, it will appear to move as you travel around. Where your debate with RonJ went a bit awry is that you didn’t realise that you were both saying the same thing - he was saying that he had observed precisely that phenomenon himself.

The reason I brought in my point about aircraft gyro systems was to show you that, in order to be useful to pilots, attitude indicators have to be corrected for this effect - otherwise they show would progressive pitching, of one degree for every nautical miles, as the aircraft travelled over long distances, as other time-based errors caused by the earth’s rotation.

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #96 on: April 30, 2023, 01:17:53 PM »
[

You can't be serious. If the globe model was true and you had a theoretical gyroscope that didn't get affected by external forces (which can't happen in reality), it would not drift at all. Because in the globe model curved = level.

You didn't say that was wrong. How is that wrong?

Ok…we’re back talking about gyros again.

You actually weren’t really wrong. I’d slightly challenge you on the curved=level bit, as that’s not how we define level, but I think I get what you mean. But your broader point is correct - if you take a full freedom gyro and move it around the world it will keep pointing to a fixed point in space, so yes, it will appear to move as you travel around. Where your debate with RonJ went a bit awry is that you didn’t realise that you were both saying the same thing - he was saying that he had observed precisely that phenomenon himself.

The reason I brought in my point about aircraft gyro systems was to show you that, in order to be useful to pilots, attitude indicators have to be corrected for this effect - otherwise they show would progressive pitching, of one degree for every nautical miles, as the aircraft travelled over long distances, as other time-based errors caused by the earth’s rotation.

Yeah, but you're both assuming that the Earth is a globe and I'm not, because it's actually not a globe. So you're using circular reasoning if you're utilizing that as prove for your globe belief.

As far as any errors due to "earth’s rotation" - you're only hypothesizing that to be the cause of the errors.

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #97 on: April 30, 2023, 01:32:21 PM »
[
Yeah, but you're both assuming that the Earth is a globe and I'm not, because it's actually not a globe. So you're using circular reasoning if you're utilizing that as prove for your globe belief.

As far as any errors due to "earth’s rotation" - you're only hypothesizing that to be the cause of the errors.

Attitude gyros are seen to pitch by 1 degree every 60 nautical miles, which is exactly what you would expect for the size and shape of the earth as we understand it. Heading indicators wander by 15 degrees per hour, multiplied by the sine of the latitude of the gyro position. Again, this is exactly what we would expect for the size, shape and rotation of the earth as we know it.

What else could cause these errors?

Dual1ty

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #98 on: April 30, 2023, 01:36:59 PM »
[
Yeah, but you're both assuming that the Earth is a globe and I'm not, because it's actually not a globe. So you're using circular reasoning if you're utilizing that as prove for your globe belief.

As far as any errors due to "earth’s rotation" - you're only hypothesizing that to be the cause of the errors.

Attitude gyros are seen to pitch by 1 degree every 60 nautical miles, which is exactly what you would expect for the size and shape of the earth as we understand it. Heading indicators wander by 15 degrees per hour, multiplied by the sine of the latitude of the gyro position. Again, this is exactly what we would expect for the size, shape and rotation of the earth as we know it.

What else could cause these errors?

Why are you asking me? I would say gravity or magnetism because both your models of those things are wrong, just like your models of Earth and the "Solar System" are wrong.

SteelyBob

Re: Altitude related g... where are the experiments?
« Reply #99 on: April 30, 2023, 01:58:58 PM »
Why are you asking me? I would say gravity or magnetism because both your models of those things are wrong, just like your models of Earth and the "Solar System" are wrong.

I’m asking because you’ve rejected my suggestion. If you’re prepared to reject something then it suggests that you disagree with it. That’s fine, but only if you can propose some other mechanism, and unfortunately vague statements like ‘gravity’ or ‘magnetism’ aren’t credible explanations.

It’s ok not to understand stuff. But it sounds very much like you are rejecting what I am saying because it does not conform to your idea of what the world is like. That isn’t a good way to approach things.