The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Ga_x2 on September 30, 2017, 09:42:55 PM
-
Apologies in advance for asking a question that has already been posed, but from a search in the upper fora I couldn't find a detailed answer. Threads kinda went all over the place.
What is the FE model for how tides work?
Today in my area the high tide was shortly before 10:00 AM, and the second high was shortly past 9:00 PM. The second was the less intense of the two. I can give other details if needed.
The wiki has this to say:
Celestial Gravitation is a part of some Flat Earth models which involve an attraction by all objects of mass on earth to the heavenly bodies. This is not the same as Gravity, since Celestial Gravitation does not imply an attraction between objects of mass on Earth. Celestial Gravitation accounts for tides and other gravimetric anomalies across the Earth's plane.
Which beside being a statement rife with problems of various nature has zero explanatory power.
I would love for some FEr to expand a bit on the concept, maybe explain what is causing the timing I gave, and I'm preemptively asking 3Dgeek et al to please NOT chime in to explain how tides work in a RE model (I don't know in detail and don't care), or how they think the FES thinks they work. This is a honest question which I'd like to see answered and not an invitation for a debate / derailing / general crapshooting
Thanks, cheers
-
Which beside being a statement rife with problems of various nature has zero explanatory power.
Can I save this for future use?
-
Apologies in advance for asking a question that has already been posed, but from a search in the upper fora I couldn't find a detailed answer. Threads kinda went all over the place.
What is the FE model for how tides work?
Today in my area the high tide was shortly before 10:00 AM, and the second high was shortly past 9:00 PM. The second was the less intense of the two. I can give other details if needed.
The wiki has this to say:
Celestial Gravitation is a part of some Flat Earth models which involve an attraction by all objects of mass on earth to the heavenly bodies. This is not the same as Gravity, since Celestial Gravitation does not imply an attraction between objects of mass on Earth. Celestial Gravitation accounts for tides and other gravimetric anomalies across the Earth's plane.
Which beside being a statement rife with problems of various nature has zero explanatory power.
I would love for some FEr to expand a bit on the concept, maybe explain what is causing the timing I gave, and I'm preemptively asking 3Dgeek et al to please NOT chime in to explain how tides work in a RE model (I don't know in detail and don't care), or how they think the FES thinks they work. This is a honest question which I'd like to see answered and not an invitation for a debate / derailing / general crapshooting
Thanks, cheers
God doesn't explain everything to us, or need to, our bodies for example are so complex in their daily working that the medical community is still baffled and amazed at the brilliant design.
Moses probably knew the timing of the low tides as land appeared in the red sea only to swallow the chasing soldiers as the tide rose again. God lowered the DEEP or ocean floors and raised the mountains to disperse and place the global flood waters in a way we have our continents of today.
Maybe one needs to think of the DEEP as GOD's body. The very deep ocean floors his chest that inhale and exhale twice a day giving this living earth it's high and low tides. Maybe tides are nothing more than our reminder of his brilliant design as he cradles us in his bosom? He controls all life breathing dependably day in and day out for eternity.
-
God does it
Thanks for the contribution. It's a possibility.
There's a catch, though. My municipality has a service predicting the tides (it's important around here) and it's very precise. It's not a church though, so I don't think they are in contact with the almighty. Do you happen to know *how* God does it? ;D
-
God does it
Thanks for the contribution. It's a possibility.
There's a catch, though. My municipality has a service predicting the tides (it's important around here) and it's very precise. It's not a church though, so I don't think they are in contact with the almighty. Do you happen to know *how* God does it? ;D
most likely the same way he creates an electrical current in your body that surrounds your heart causing it to contract (pump) 2.5 BILLION times in your life. Did your crew figure that one out?
-
God does it
Thanks for the contribution. It's a possibility.
There's a catch, though. My municipality has a service predicting the tides (it's important around here) and it's very precise. It's not a church though, so I don't think they are in contact with the almighty. Do you happen to know *how* God does it? ;D
most likely the same way he creates an electrical current in your body that surrounds your heart causing it to contract (pump) 2.5 BILLION times in your life. Did your crew figure that one out?
I don't know, I can check with a cardiologist, if you want. What does this have to do with the OP?
-
God does it
Thanks for the contribution. It's a possibility.
There's a catch, though. My municipality has a service predicting the tides (it's important around here) and it's very precise. It's not a church though, so I don't think they are in contact with the almighty. Do you happen to know *how* God does it? ;D
most likely the same way he creates an electrical current in your body that surrounds your heart causing it to contract (pump) 2.5 BILLION times in your life. Did your crew figure that one out?
I don't know, I can check with a cardiologist, if you want. What does this have to do with the OP?
Because you ridicule the creator and expect someone not of God to understand. You can't even understand the basic principle of life, the body and how it works, yet you think YOU should be given the answer as to how something divine works.
Not only did God do it, he did everything. I know it's tough to swallow but your the one asking the questions because your clueless. Get it?
-
I don't know.
NEXT!
-
Which beside being a statement rife with problems of various nature has zero explanatory power.
Can I save this for future use?
Be my guest ;D
-
God doesn't explain everything to us, or need to, our bodies for example are so complex in their daily working that the medical community is still baffled and amazed at the brilliant design.
Moses probably knew the timing of the low tides as land appeared in the red sea only to swallow the chasing soldiers as the tide rose again. God lowered the DEEP or ocean floors and raised the mountains to disperse and place the global flood waters in a way we have our continents of today.
Maybe one needs to think of the DEEP as GOD's body. The very deep ocean floors his chest that inhale and exhale twice a day giving this living earth it's high and low tides. Maybe tides are nothing more than our reminder of his brilliant design as he cradles us in his bosom? He controls all life breathing dependably day in and day out for eternity.
I don't understand why you're here. It sounds like asking questions is pointless because God did everything and doesn't have to explain himself to us.
That's great, except He DID explain lots to us, because we are able to calculate, with phenomenal precision:
- The timing of the tides
- The timing of eclipses, both solar and lunar, CENTURIES in advance
And that's leaving out anything that you might think is a fairy tale like GPS satellites.
If God Did It and That Settles It, why are you even in here talking to us losers? Why is there a forum? Why ask questions at all?
Why isn't the Wiki just "God did it, stop asking questions."?
-
God doesn't explain everything to us, or need to, our bodies for example are so complex in their daily working that the medical community is still baffled and amazed at the brilliant design.
Moses probably knew the timing of the low tides as land appeared in the red sea only to swallow the chasing soldiers as the tide rose again. God lowered the DEEP or ocean floors and raised the mountains to disperse and place the global flood waters in a way we have our continents of today.
Maybe one needs to think of the DEEP as GOD's body. The very deep ocean floors his chest that inhale and exhale twice a day giving this living earth it's high and low tides. Maybe tides are nothing more than our reminder of his brilliant design as he cradles us in his bosom? He controls all life breathing dependably day in and day out for eternity.
I don't understand why you're here. It sounds like asking questions is pointless because God did everything and doesn't have to explain himself to us.
That's great, except He DID explain lots to us, because we are able to calculate, with phenomenal precision:
- The timing of the tides
- The timing of eclipses, both solar and lunar, CENTURIES in advance
And that's leaving out anything that you might think is a fairy tale like GPS satellites.
If God Did It and That Settles It, why are you even in here talking to us losers? Why is there a forum? Why ask questions at all?
Why isn't the Wiki just "God did it, stop asking questions."?
Because it's a battle of good and evil. I'm choppin a few demonic heads here and there. Glad I'm under your skin.
You go ahead and use the "oh the moon pulls the water off both sides of the earth" spinning ball nonsense for tides.
In all of recorded time only twice in history, once in 1960 and once in 2012 did a submersible reach the bottom of the ocean. Even military subs only go 1/10 as deep. So yes you tell me how God explained it to you or let you see? Come again? I'm listening
Who asks questions here on this forum? The roundies not the God fearing FE'ers, we know the score.
-
More OT god talk
Look, either you have something relevant to the question to say or you're wasting everyone's time.
Everyday my municipality predicts the timing of the tides. And they are right. That alone disproves everything you've been blabbing about so far, so either provide an explanation or go pester someone else in the debate forum. Where's junker when he's needed? :P
-
More OT god talk
Look, either you have something relevant to the question to say or you're wasting everyone's time.
Everyday my municipality predicts the timing of the tides. And they are right. That alone disproves everything you've been blabbing about so far, so either provide an explanation or go pester someone else in the debate forum. Where's junker when he's needed? :P
I think you're stuck in the hot down under. You don't even open your mind to let refreshing thoughts enter. You're stuck on the CERN quest of finding or acting like the GOD particle. You can't get there without acceptance.
Let me give you a quote from a document:
"A document dated 1056 A.D. describes a similarly constructed table for the Chhien Thang river in China. What the producers of such tables
could not do was explain why tides should occur in the first place. The thought occurred to both European and Oriental thinkers
that the Earth itself might be alternately inhaling and exhaling sea water."
So you see Mr. RE'er no GOD just science men (thinkers) placing an answer to a question. Guys with brains.
https://www.siam.org/pdf/news/621.pdf
So when I give you an answer the way I did in my first post, you should understand I am a "thinker" "a man of God" which gives you truth and knowledge if only you want it.
Oh and Junker has not power over me. None, zip, I abide by the rules of my creator.
-
More God talk
Look, this has even less explanatory power than the wiki, and that's saying a lot.
I had a chuckle seeing you use scarequotes when describing yourself as a thinker, though. ;D
NEXT!
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong. Okay so the moon pulls the tides out with its mass and there is two high tides a day but in the GIF it only shows the moon being in one place daily but the moon is moving faster than the sun and it show up twice in a day this can also explain why the moon is visible in daylight sometimes and also why it rises in different places it inst moving in a circular motion it is moving in a more crazy motion and a lot faster. this theory also explains eclipses and why the don't last for a day and are only view able in some countries :) correct me if u think i'm wrong, have another theory or dont understand,
-
Let me give you a quote from a document:
"A document dated 1056 A.D. describes a similarly constructed table for the Chhien Thang river in China. What the producers of such tables
could not do was explain why tides should occur in the first place. The thought occurred to both European and Oriental thinkers
that the Earth itself might be alternately inhaling and exhaling sea water."
So you see Mr. RE'er no GOD just science men (thinkers) placing an answer to a question. Guys with brains.
Wow. Quoting brainy guys from the 11th century. Open minded people have learned things and generally increased knowledge in the last 900 years. Well, some of them at least.
So are you suggesting that the predictions of tides are made by having learned the Earth's breathing pattern? Interesting that they can predict them so accurately. Most things that breathe have variations of their breathing patterns.
And should I assume that knowledge of the Earth's breathing is being kept secret by evil government conspiracies?
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong.
Are you referring to this animation (GIF)? https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif (https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif)
The one that shows the moon orbiting the Earth once a day?
The one showing a repeating pattern with no seasons?
The one that can't possibly replicate the phases of the moon?
The one that shows the sun setting/rising in different directions than we observe with our eyes?
If so, it's more that slightly wrong.
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong. Okay so the moon pulls the tides out with its mass and there is two high tides a day but in the GIF it only shows the moon being in one place daily but the moon is moving faster than the sun and it show up twice in a day this can also explain why the moon is visible in daylight sometimes and also why it rises in different places it inst moving in a circular motion it is moving in a more crazy motion and a lot faster. this theory also explains eclipses and why the don't last for a day and are only view able in some countries :) correct me if u think i'm wrong, have another theory or dont understand,
you know, that would actually be a neat explanation (better than j-man's at any rate) but I don't think is confirmed by observations by either "camp"... fact is, we don't see the moon zip by at that speed. It would have to cross the sky in under 6 hours! :o
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong.
Are you referring to this animation (GIF)? https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif (https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif)
The one that shows the moon orbiting the Earth once a day?
The one showing a repeating pattern with no seasons?
The one that can't possibly replicate the phases of the moon?
The one that shows the sun setting/rising in different directions than we observe with our eyes?
If so, it's more that slightly wrong.
fine then very wrong but the thing about the sun is the if north is at the centre of a flat earth then from all different parts of the world north would point to the center south would point to the outside and east would piont to where the sun rises in a day as for the moon i explained it wasnt moving in that pattern and the seasons on it was wrong too the i think it would revolve in ovals that slightly change daily so at some points it would be in different parts of a country making it warmer and colder hence seasons
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong. Okay so the moon pulls the tides out with its mass and there is two high tides a day but in the GIF it only shows the moon being in one place daily but the moon is moving faster than the sun and it show up twice in a day this can also explain why the moon is visible in daylight sometimes and also why it rises in different places it inst moving in a circular motion it is moving in a more crazy motion and a lot faster. this theory also explains eclipses and why the don't last for a day and are only view able in some countries :) correct me if u think i'm wrong, have another theory or dont understand,
you know, that would actually be a neat explanation (better than j-man's at any rate) but I don't think is confirmed by observations by either "camp"... fact is, we don't see the moon zip by at that speed. It would have to cross the sky in under 6 hours! :o
that is true but we can see the moon move while in the sky not zipping by but if there was a telescope pointing towards the moon at night and u watched the telescope for half an hour u would see it move
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong.
Are you referring to this animation (GIF)? https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif (https://wiki.tfes.org/File:SunAnimation.gif)
The one that shows the moon orbiting the Earth once a day?
The one showing a repeating pattern with no seasons?
The one that can't possibly replicate the phases of the moon?
The one that shows the sun setting/rising in different directions than we observe with our eyes?
If so, it's more that slightly wrong.
fine then very wrong but the thing about the sun is the if north is at the centre of a flat earth then from all different parts of the world north would point to the center south would point to the outside and east would piont to where the sun rises in a day as for the moon i explained it wasnt moving in that pattern and the seasons on it was wrong too the i think it would revolve in ovals that slightly change daily so at some points it would be in different parts of a country making it warmer and colder hence seasons
So we agreed that the animation of the Earth/Sun/Moon on the FES wiki is completely wrong. Let's dwell on that for a moment.
Moving on... That animation doesn't show the sun rising in the east. Look where the sun is when the cone of light hits a specific spot and imagine a line connecting the two. It's not east.
I guess the main point is, that trying to explain things starting with a map that is completely wrong is always going to give you the wrong answers.
-
The moon moves across the sky almost exactly like the sun does, there's definitely no possibility of it moving across the sky twice as fast. It actually moves slightly SLOWER than the sun.
Next time there's a new moon, wait a couple of days and you'll see the crescent moon in the sky just after sunset. The next night, it will be slightly higher and slightly fuller at sunset. So while the sun has appeared to make a complete circuit, the moon makes slightly less than one circuit.
-
Because it's a battle of good and evil. I'm choppin a few demonic heads here and there. Glad I'm under your skin.
Well at least that makes sense. I'm sorry you feel that I'm evil though - or maybe I'm just misguided or misled by the devil or something?
You go ahead and use the "oh the moon pulls the water off both sides of the earth" spinning ball nonsense for tides.
In all of recorded time only twice in history, once in 1960 and once in 2012 did a submersible reach the bottom of the ocean. Even military subs only go 1/10 as deep. So yes you tell me how God explained it to you or let you see? Come again? I'm listening
Well now hold on a second. Using the "spinning ball nonsense" for tides, humans have been able to correctly calculate the exact timing and magnitude of the tides well in advance. Can you do that with "God is making the earth breathe" conjecture?
It sounds like you're saying that at the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean there is a hole through which water flows to make the tides raise and lower. This cannot explain how tides actually work, which is that they are low in one part of the earth and high in another at the same time, and where the tide is high and where the tide is low corresponds exactly to the predictions made by the spinning ball nonsense.
Seriously, can you take the "God did it" explanation and make any predictions about how the world works? Should we throw out tide tables and eclipse predictions because it's spinning ball nonsense?
Who asks questions here on this forum? The roundies not the God fearing FE'ers, we know the score.
That's entirely my point. If you don't ask questions because you know all the answers, but you can't even predict when the tide will come and go, I guess you don't care about sailing. What else can't you accomplish if you don't ask questions about how the world works? Are diseases caused by viruses and bacteria or by bad humours or evil spirits? Who knows! Stop asking questions!
-
that is true but we can see the moon move while in the sky not zipping by but if there was a telescope pointing towards the moon at night and u watched the telescope for half an hour u would see it move
of course it moves, it just doesn't move so fast to circle the world two times a day... That is a set fact that neither group here would dispute, I think.
Today, for instance, the moon around my parts will rise sometime past 5 pm and set at around 3 am. It goes slowly :)
-
The earth gives off it's liquids with reliability. Can this type of clockwork create oceanic tides? Of course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tShhZvvIM84
-
The earth gives off it's liquids with reliability. Can this type of clockwork create oceanic tides? Of course.
From nps.gov Yellowstone site
The average interval between eruptions of Old Faithful Geyser changes; as of October 2015, the usual interval is 94 minutes ± 10 minutes, with intervals ranging from 51 to 120 minutes. Old Faithful can vary in height from 106 to more than 180 feet, averaging 130 feet. Eruptions normally last between 1½ to 5 minutes and expel from 3,700 to 8,400 gallons of water.
You think you can predict tides from something like that?
Typical FE response. I found something about water. I've answered the questions about tides. Yeah me! No need to think about it any more.
-
The earth gives off it's liquids with reliability. Can this type of clockwork create oceanic tides? Of course.
From nps.gov Yellowstone site
The average interval between eruptions of Old Faithful Geyser changes; as of October 2015, the usual interval is 94 minutes ± 10 minutes, with intervals ranging from 51 to 120 minutes. Old Faithful can vary in height from 106 to more than 180 feet, averaging 130 feet. Eruptions normally last between 1½ to 5 minutes and expel from 3,700 to 8,400 gallons of water.
You think you can predict tides from something like that?
Typical FE response. I found something about water. I've answered the questions about tides. Yeah me! No need to think about it any more.
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
-
The earth gives off it's liquids with reliability. Can this type of clockwork create oceanic tides? Of course.
From nps.gov Yellowstone site
The average interval between eruptions of Old Faithful Geyser changes; as of October 2015, the usual interval is 94 minutes ± 10 minutes, with intervals ranging from 51 to 120 minutes. Old Faithful can vary in height from 106 to more than 180 feet, averaging 130 feet. Eruptions normally last between 1½ to 5 minutes and expel from 3,700 to 8,400 gallons of water.
You think you can predict tides from something like that?
Typical FE response. I found something about water. I've answered the questions about tides. Yeah me! No need to think about it any more.
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Can't do that while still affected by Earth's gravitational field. Also as a note to try to give some idea of scale, with 1/4 inch of water, the globe for the Earth would have to be roughly 829 inches in diameter. Or just over 69 feet.
-
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Can't do that while still affected by Earth's gravitational field. Also as a note to try to give some idea of scale, with 1/4 inch of water, the globe for the Earth would have to be roughly 829 inches in diameter. Or just over 69 feet.
Thanks Squirrel, was going to say something similar.
Another typical response, change the subject and redirect. He states that something like geysers causes tides, that just magically coincide with the orbit of the moon, then tries to shift the burden of proof to someone else with an experiment that can't work in a gravitational field.
-
The earth gives off it's liquids with reliability. Can this type of clockwork create oceanic tides? Of course.
From nps.gov Yellowstone site
The average interval between eruptions of Old Faithful Geyser changes; as of October 2015, the usual interval is 94 minutes ± 10 minutes, with intervals ranging from 51 to 120 minutes. Old Faithful can vary in height from 106 to more than 180 feet, averaging 130 feet. Eruptions normally last between 1½ to 5 minutes and expel from 3,700 to 8,400 gallons of water.
You think you can predict tides from something like that?
Typical FE response. I found something about water. I've answered the questions about tides. Yeah me! No need to think about it any more.
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
If we did your experiment in the depths of space (where there is no OTHER gravity tugging on it) - and if we rotated the tiny globe (made out of suitably dense rock) very slowly (only once every 24 hours) - then indeed, the water would stick to it. The tiny gravity of a ball of rock is enough to oppose the very tiny centrifugal force of such slow rotation speeds.
But you're imagining the ball here on earth - but here, the earth's gravity totally overwhelms the ball's gravity - so the water falls off.
So don't just jump to conclusions..."OH! This sounds impossible! It's can't be true!"...well, stop and think about it for a moment. When you do, the truth will emerge.
-
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Thank you all, especially qeek for confirming you can't replicate it, not here, not in outer space. It's all BS water sticking to a ball.
Breathe deep God, the tides work great like old faithful.
-
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Thank you all, especially qeek for confirming you can't replicate it, not here, not in outer space. It's all BS water sticking to a ball.
Breathe deep God, the tides work great like old faithful.
Are you terminally incapable of reading a darned thing?
YES WE COULD REPLICATE IT IN SPACE.
We even know how Old Faithful works. It's a hole in the ground, with some seriously hot rocks at the bottom and a small underground stream that slowly feeds water into the hole.
The water at the bottom of the hole boils into steam which propels the rest of the water out of the geyser in a fountain.
But then, cold water from the stream floods back in, cooling the surface of the rock. Now it's a race against time. The stream is filling the hole with water, while the rocks below gradually heat up again, then start warming up the water again. Once the water hits boiling point, the process starts all over again.
The pressure of the water coming into the hole varies slightly through the year and depends on recent rainfall and so forth - and this explains the small variations in the period of the effect.
How the heck you get from that to Ocean tides is anyone's guess. Aside from water moving - there is NOTHING to connect the dots here.
You're really kinda useless at doing this stuff aren't you?
-
Thanks Qeek for the confirmation that there is no video of the replication of water sticking to a spinning ball. If there had been you would have posted it. Why don't you do a CGI 3d one since it's your field? Fake it, like NASA
-
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Thank you all, especially qeek for confirming you can't replicate it, not here, not in outer space. It's all BS water sticking to a ball.
Breathe deep God, the tides work great like old faithful.
I'll get right on that after you prove anything you said about the Earth breathing tides.
Seriously, no one could actually be this ignorant. I guess you just like trolling for sake of trolling.
Add one to the FE response standard plan.
Option 1:Derail by changing subject.
Option 2:Ignore.
Option 3:Derail by suggesting something so stupid everyone forgets the original subject.
-
Thanks Qeek for the confirmation that there is no video of the replication of water sticking to a spinning ball. If there had been you would have posted it. Why don't you do a CGI 3d one since it's your field? Fake it, like NASA
Foul on the play. Moving the goalposts. 10-yard penalty. Automatic first down.
-
LOL. But no ejection option like unsportsman like conduct.
-
LOL. But no ejection option like unsportsman like conduct.
I try not to directly engage J-man. At best he's a troll, at worst he actually believes whole heartedly what he's saying. Either way there's no discussion with him when everything boils down to "God did it" or "Satan did it" in his apparent worldview. Also, apologies to Junker for how off-track this thread has gotten. Lemme see where we were...
Hmm, not very far. My best guess for a way to explain tides on a FE would be it's own weird sort of momentum. The moon pulling at the water as it passes above creates a mirror effect on the opposite side in some way similar to how it works on a RE. Seems alright on the surface like so much of FE at least.
-
LOL. But no ejection option like unsportsman like conduct.
I try not to directly engage J-man. At best he's a troll, at worst he actually believes whole heartedly what he's saying. Either way there's no discussion with him when everything boils down to "God did it" or "Satan did it" in his apparent worldview. Also, apologies to Junker for how off-track this thread has gotten. Lemme see where we were...
Hmm, not very far. My best guess for a way to explain tides on a FE would be it's own weird sort of momentum. The moon pulling at the water as it passes above creates a mirror effect on the opposite side in some way similar to how it works on a RE. Seems alright on the surface like so much of FE at least.
Wait what? You're allowed to post some ridiculous theory off the top of your head but I give a 2,000 & 1,000 year old, (one being from scientist in a book) fact and mine is dismissed. Laughable, but RE folks are laughable huh....More Kool-aid and Chemtrails please
-
So, page 2 and no answer with a lick of explanatory power. Par for the course, I guess. Anyone else?
-
God does it
Thanks for the contribution. It's a possibility.
There's a catch, though. My municipality has a service predicting the tides (it's important around here) and it's very precise. It's not a church though, so I don't think they are in contact with the almighty. Do you happen to know *how* God does it? ;D
most likely the same way he creates an electrical current in your body that surrounds your heart causing it to contract (pump) 2.5 BILLION times in your life. Did your crew figure that one out?
I don't know, I can check with a cardiologist, if you want. What does this have to do with the OP?
Because you ridicule the creator and expect someone not of God to understand. You can't even understand the basic principle of life, the body and how it works, yet you think YOU should be given the answer as to how something divine works.
Not only did God do it, he did everything. I know it's tough to swallow but your the one asking the questions because your clueless. Get it?
J-Man, you're stepping on some dangerous grounds. You are very religious, but there are enough people out there who do not believe in God. We can explain multiple topics scientifically, without offending Him, and no matter how many times you play the sycophant and try to flatter the eyes of God with the dance of dramatic verbosity, you cannot prove a point very infallibly. Please, consider your words. Explain to us why you think God is the creator, for once and all. Explain to us the relevance of God in the fashion of an occurrence capable of evidence. Deduction, my friend. Mark its capabilities.
-
Explain to us why you think God is the creator, for once and all
sure, in another thread. So that maybe there's space left in this one, just in case someone wants to answer the frigging OP instead of constantly derailing. Thanks.
-
I'd love to see someone predict the tide timing accurately from the "God is breathing" theory.
-
i genuinely think i have an explanation for the two high tides and its simply that the GIF on the FAQs is slightly wrong. Okay so the moon pulls the tides out with its mass and there is two high tides a day but in the GIF it only shows the moon being in one place daily but the moon is moving faster than the sun and it show up twice in a day this can also explain why the moon is visible in daylight sometimes and also why it rises in different places it inst moving in a circular motion it is moving in a more crazy motion and a lot faster. this theory also explains eclipses and why the don't last for a day and are only view able in some countries :) correct me if u think i'm wrong, have another theory or dont understand,
you know, that would actually be a neat explanation (better than j-man's at any rate) but I don't think is confirmed by observations by either "camp"... fact is, we don't see the moon zip by at that speed. It would have to cross the sky in under 6 hours! :o
More to the point, you'd have to see the moon cross the sky twice in 24 hours - once for each of the two tides. That doesn't happen...so this explanation is busted.
The tides happen (roughly) twice per day - one high tide when the moon is overhead and another when it's overhead on the opposite side of the world.
Because the moon's motion around the Earth is combined with the Earth's rotation, the tides are actually about 12.5 hours apart, not exactly 12. This fact of tide times really brings home the fact that tides are definitely related most strongly to the cycles of the moon. However, the sun actually adds (or subtracts) it's own tides on a precise 12 hour cycle. But because the sun is SO far away (at least in RET) it's tidal effects are rather small.
So if you look at water level charts, you see two sine-waves added together - one with that 12 hour cycle and another with a roughly 12.5 hour cycle
Explaining all of this subtlety is FAR beyond what FET can manage.
In RET, the explanation is really very simple.
-
One week later, and this is the situation:
- 3dgeek couldn't resist explaining how tides work in a RE (I knew you couldn't! ;D);
- Sammy proposed a supersonic moon passing by twice a day, which not even the FE crowd would accept;
- j-man makes shit up as he goes along, and that's kind of his modus operandi... (even FErs don't seem to be willing to touch him with a 10' pole) so no hope there either.
- I'm a bit miffed by the absence of hmmm with a fake moon holografic projection multiple moons "theory" but I suppose he wouldn't comment an OP clearly coming from a reptilian;
Anyone else willing to chime in? Should I put "tides" in the bin of topics for which the FES doesn't have a discernible answer, along with the Cavendish experiment?
(And tbh with the layout of the continents, the path of the objects in the sky and a few other topics which I didn't personally ask, but I've seen butcher in various threads so far)
-
Understanding High and Low tides doesn't have to be a difficult task. One needs to keep track and they will continue with regularity till the end of time. Tides are the movement of water and water is very important to God. In his creation of the universe, water was made on the 2nd day.
Genesis1-6 And God said, Let there be a firmament (dome) in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Now some scoffed at the notion that the tides could be tied to Gods breathing. So, I asked him. You see God wants men to be humble and "Men do therefore fear him: he respects not any that are wise of heart".
In John 7:38
"To the one who believes in Me, it is just as the Scripture has said: 'Streams of living water will flow from within him.'" So rest assured I believe and the knowledge I give is from God.
Now what is water? Water is Gods knowledge. In Isaiah the water is a simile for the knowledge of God. We are baptized in it. Water symbolizes Gods Word in many places throughout the Bible. In both Psalms and Ephesians water is symbols of God's word. Ephesians 5:26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word.
Now lets dig a little deeper. Is water living? YES, Living water is a biblical term which appears in both the Old and New Testaments. In Jeremiah 2:13 and 17:13, the prophet describes God as "the spring of living water", who has been forsaken by his chosen people Israel.
Then we have Job being scolded by God in
38:8 “Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt’?
Break the word down, The SEA has doors or passage ways and a womb (womens birth canal), it wears garments signifying a living thing, placing limits on its travel destinations and having a mind/heart of it’s own that feels PRIDE. Oh yes my friends the sea is a living thing created by God.
And living things: BREATHE regularly…..
-
Aaand another week gone by. Time flies when you're having fun.
Making a mental note that the A in the forum title doesn't stand for Answers. Maybe it's quirks & absurdities, or something like that.
So no one in the damn board knows how tides work? There's people expounding on relativity and celestial gears and magic perspective and tides are a friggin mystery? Seriously?
-
Either you are a valid Catholic or the greatest man I know.
In favor of the latter contradiction: a pure, poetic erudite,
Ingenuity easily unmatched by some barbaric administrators.
He flatters no one. He trumps all. A fitting depiction of your profile!
Equipped and armed with clever humor, die by his keyboard like earnest fools.
Deserving of transcendental-quality reverence of prodigious strength; I applaud you, J-man.
A Sestet.
-
Tides are due to the Geodesic deviation by the moon and sun. Think of it this way, you got aether (a fabric of space-time), the moon (and sun) warps it (because of its energy content), any object or fluid it moves by will be affected, it will follow that warp. The water will remain at it's level but when the aether it is in becomes more non-homogeneous (distorted, not equal across like flat undistorted aether), it's going to follow that aether warp as straight.
'Celestial Gravitation" is not the correct term for it since it's not forcing water away from its level, but rather, the aether it is in is non-homogeneous, so therefore the straightest path of water is non-homogeneous (equating to what we perceive as a rise or a bulge in water).
Two tides a day are because the water is warped away from a particular part of Earth and other water is left behind, having two high tides.
I've heard of other explanations for tides in the context of Flat Earth models that may not include the moon and sun, but I feel there is good evidence that the moon contributes greatly to tides.
-
Tides are due to the Geodesic deviation by the moon and sun. Think of it this way, you got aether (a fabric of space-time), the moon (and sun) warps it (because of its energy content), any object or fluid it moves by will be affected, it will follow that warp. The water will remain at it's level but when the aether it is in becomes more non-homogeneous (distorted, not equal across like flat undistorted aether), it's going to follow that aether warp as straight.
'Celestial Gravitation" is not the correct term for it since it's not forcing water away from its level, but rather, the aether it is in is non-homogeneous, so therefore the straightest path of water is non-homogeneous (equating to what we perceive as a rise or a bulge in water).
Two tides a day are because the water is warped away from a particular part of Earth and other water is left behind, having two high tides.
I've heard of other explanations for tides in the context of Flat Earth models that may not include the moon and sun, but I feel there is good evidence that the moon contributes greatly to tides.
It sounds to me like you are just using different terminology for the newtonian model of tides. I'm not sure what I could disagree with here, except, is there a way to quantify the tides using your aether idea? Newton's laws give you tidal forces quite accurately - as in, Newton calculated these exact numbers in his Principia.
-
Two tides a day are because the water is warped away from a particular part of Earth and other water is left behind, having two high tides.
ok, this part has to be explained, as for the rest, you seem to use aether as a substitute for gravity, so no problem there. (Well there are some, I guess, but they can wait)
Is the rest of the Flat Earth Society ok with this explanation? I understand that aether isn't part of the "standard model" (lol)
-
It sounds to me like you are just using different terminology for the newtonian model of tides. I'm not sure what I could disagree with here, except, is there a way to quantify the tides using your aether idea? Newton's laws give you tidal forces quite accurately - as in, Newton calculated these exact numbers in his Principia.
It is quite similar to gravitation in that if you assume euclidean space-time ('aether'), this geodesic deviation could be described as gravitation (boil down to equivalent effects on the water), these geodesic deviations would give a relative acceleration between the moon and the Earth. So, it equates to a celestial gravitation in terms of effect but differs in that it has water find its straightest path through the warped aether.
The geodesics calculations would get quite complicated, but I'll put up a couple links to descriptions that may clarify it for you.
http://www.aei.mpg.de/~rezzolla/lnotes/virgo/geodev.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic_deviation
https://books.google.com/books?id=5DtkqcET4b0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false (pg. 275)
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/gr/geodesic.deviation.html
-
Two tides a day are because the water is warped away from a particular part of Earth and other water is left behind, having two high tides.
ok, this part has to be explained, as for the rest, you seem to use aether as a substitute for gravity, so no problem there. (Well there are some, I guess, but they can wait)
The water is warped away from a particular area (the moons geodesic deviation is at the highest magnitude in the area it is most directly facing), and other water farthest away lags behind, leaving a tidal bulge opposite of the moon. This leaves one tide facing the moon and the other opposite of the moon (two tides, separated almost 12 hours apart).
Is the rest of the Flat Earth Society ok with this explanation? I understand that aether isn't part of the "standard model" (lol)
What "standard model"? I thought the celestial gravitation wiki page made it clear that multiple with differing explanations may exist.
Aether is just a term for the space-time fabric of the universe (there may be disagreements on how to describe it and it's effects).
-
You'll never believe it but as the moon rotates around me last night, like the oceans my wood chips in my planter began to levitate toward the moon. Of course a few hours later they were back in place although somewhat in different locations. That celestial pull is awesome to watch.
-
You can actually measure it if you have a sensitive enough scale (gravimeter). Currently they are tens of thousands of dollars, but there are some solid state gravimeters that may drive cost down:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35926147
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7596/full/nature17397.html
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/736E/production/_89005592_untitled.jpg)
-
Two tides a day are because the water is warped away from a particular part of Earth and other water is left behind, having two high tides.
ok, this part has to be explained, as for the rest, you seem to use aether as a substitute for gravity, so no problem there. (Well there are some, I guess, but they can wait)
The water is warped away from a particular area (the moons geodesic deviation is at the highest magnitude in the area it is most directly facing), and other water farthest away lags behind, leaving a tidal bulge opposite of the moon. This leaves one tide facing the moon and the other opposite of the moon (two tides, separated almost 12 hours apart).
can you please draw a diagram with the flat earth and the positions of this bulge and of the "lag"? Saying opposite of the moon on a flat earth makes really little sense. How come do we have a lag that's higher than the bulge? Why would you have a lag at all?Is the rest of the Flat Earth Society ok with this explanation? I understand that aether isn't part of the "standard model" (lol)
What "standard model"? I thought the celestial gravitation wiki page made it clear that multiple with differing explanations may exist.
Aether is just a term for the space-time fabric of the universe (there may be disagreements on how to describe it and it's effects).
I used the scarequotes for a reason. There is no standard model, but afaik no one in here has ever presented anything in the neighbourhood of what you are writing. The "celestial gravitation wiki page" is the paragraph I cite in the OP. And it doesn't make anything clear. To call that a word salad is being charitable.
-
You can actually measure it if you have a sensitive enough scale (gravimeter). Currently they are tens of thousands of dollars, but there are some solid state gravimeters that may drive cost down:
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35926147
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7596/full/nature17397.html
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/736E/production/_89005592_untitled.jpg)
You can see it in the bathroom for free. Hop on the scale and watch your weight fluctuate during the day. Totally awesome.
-
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/736E/production/_89005592_untitled.jpg)
You can see it in the bathroom for free. Hop on the scale and watch your weight fluctuate during the day. Totally awesome.
I know you don't understand much science - but if you could just concentrate on the label on the left of the graph. "Acceleration (uGal)" - then notice that the tide is producing a change in acceleration that's within plus or minus 80 uGal of "normal".
"Gal" is short for "galileo" and it's a unit used in the measurement of gravity. A "galileo" is an acceleration of one centimeter per second per second. Which is to say that normal Earth gravity is 9.8 meters/s/s - which is 980 Gals. The 'u' prefix means "micro". So Earth-normal gravity is around 980,000,000 uGal.
So the tidal force of +/- 80 uGal is about one twelve MILLIONTHS of the force of gravity.
Dunno about you - but my bathroom scale is only accurate to about the nearest ounce! So you're not going to see a darned thing.
-
One week later, and this is the situation:
- 3dgeek couldn't resist explaining how tides work in a RE (I knew you couldn't! ;D);
The tides happen (roughly) twice per day - one high tide when the moon is overhead and (*low tide*) when it's overhead on the opposite side of the world.
Because the moon's motion around the Earth is combined with the Earth's rotation, the tides are actually about 12.5 hours apart, not exactly 12. This fact of tide times really brings home the fact that tides are definitely related most strongly to the cycles of the moon. However, the sun actually adds (or subtracts) it's own tides on a precise 12 hour cycle. But because the sun is SO far away (at least in RET) it's tidal effects are rather small.
So if you look at water level charts, you see two sine-waves added together - one with that 12 hour cycle and another with a roughly 12.5 hour cycle
Explaining all of this subtlety is FAR beyond what FET can manage.
In RET, the explanation is really very simple.
3DGeek makes a valid point, in spite of admonition from Ga_x2. The equation for gravitational force is (and has been proven to be, with or without a flat Earth) (G(m1m2))/(r^2).
But there's one thing. The proportion of gravitational force between Sun&Earth and Moon&Earth are (in SI units) ((Msun)/((distance[Earth--Sun])^2))/(Mmoon/((distance[Earth--moon])^2)), which would be ((1.989 × (10^30)[kg])/((1.496 x (10^8)[km])^2))/((7.34767309 × (10^22)[kg])/((3.844 x (10^5)[km])^2)) = 178.726326. The sun has 178 times the gravitational pull that the moon has upon the Earth. The sun has a higher pull upon the Earth than the moon does. So the tides should, according to this logic, rise and fall with the sun. But it doesn't. What do you people make of that?
-
Please create a thread on round earth tides and discuss about it how much you want ;D
-
Please create a thread on round earth tides and discuss about it how much you want ;D
This isn't round Earth. This is the relationship between the moon's influence and the sun's influence. Nothing to do with the Earth except for distance between it and the moon and sun. What am I saying that's controversial in the slightest?
-
Please create a thread on round earth tides and discuss about it how much you want ;D
This isn't round Earth. This is the relationship between the moon's influence and the sun's influence. Nothing to do with the Earth except for distance between it and the moon and sun. What am I saying that's controversial in the slightest?
nothing you said is controversial, but unless you can use it to answer the question in the OP is an off topic musing :P
-
One week later, and this is the situation:
- 3dgeek couldn't resist explaining how tides work in a RE (I knew you couldn't! ;D);
The tides happen (roughly) twice per day - one high tide when the moon is overhead and (*low tide*) when it's overhead on the opposite side of the world.
Because the moon's motion around the Earth is combined with the Earth's rotation, the tides are actually about 12.5 hours apart, not exactly 12. This fact of tide times really brings home the fact that tides are definitely related most strongly to the cycles of the moon. However, the sun actually adds (or subtracts) it's own tides on a precise 12 hour cycle. But because the sun is SO far away (at least in RET) it's tidal effects are rather small.
So if you look at water level charts, you see two sine-waves added together - one with that 12 hour cycle and another with a roughly 12.5 hour cycle
Explaining all of this subtlety is FAR beyond what FET can manage.
In RET, the explanation is really very simple.
3DGeek makes a valid point, in spite of admonition from Ga_x2. The equation for gravitational force is (and has been proven to be, with or without a flat Earth) (G(m1m2))/(r^2).
But there's one thing. The proportion of gravitational force between Sun&Earth and Moon&Earth are (in SI units) ((Msun)/((distance[Earth--Sun])^2))/(Mmoon/((distance[Earth--moon])^2)), which would be ((1.989 × (10^30)[kg])/((1.496 x (10^8)[km])^2))/((7.34767309 × (10^22)[kg])/((3.844 x (10^5)[km])^2)) = 178.726326. The sun has 178 times the gravitational pull that the moon has upon the Earth. The sun has a higher pull upon the Earth than the moon does. So the tides should, according to this logic, rise and fall with the sun. But it doesn't. What do you people make of that?
Two things you're misunderstanding about tides:
FIRSTLY:
The tides caused by the sun DO exist - if you look at the graphs, they are the sum of TWO sinewaves, a large amplitude swing with a period of about 12.5 hours due to the moon and a smaller wave with a 12 hour period due to the sun.
We see the total of those two superimposed waves.
Sailors and other people who care about tides talk about "neap tides" and "spring tides" (badly named!) - where the tide is less than or greater than "normal". Why? You'd think the moon was always at the same distance and always has the same gravity - so why are there these special tides?
The neap tide happens when the sun and moon are about 90 degrees apart in the sky and the sun is trying to raise the tidal level while the moon is depressing it (or vice-versa at low tide).
The spring tide happens when the sun and moon are either close together in the sky or on opposite sides of the earth and the two tidal effects reinforce each other - so you get a higher "high tide" and a lower "low tide".
Hence we most certainly do see an effect from solar tides - it's just a lot smaller than lunar tides.
SECONDLY:
Tides don't depend only on the AMOUNT of gravity from a remote body - they depend only on the fact that the gravitational pull from sun/moon on one side of the earth is more than on the other.
So the key factor is the DIFFERENCE between the sun/moon's gravity on one side of the planet versus the other. Since the sun is about 400 times further away than the moon, the difference in distance between the two sides of the planet from the sun is a smaller percentage than that for the moon.
So even though the moon's gravity is FAR less than the sun's in absolute terms, it's proximity to us makes the tides much higher.
Sadly, although all of these effects are easily demonstrated in RET. NONE of these effects would be present in a flat earth...so...the two-tides-per-day thing is hand-waved away - along with issues of spring and neap tides.
-
Two things you're misunderstanding about tides:
FIRSTLY:
The tides caused by the sun DO exist - if you look at the graphs, they are the sum of TWO sinewaves, a large amplitude swing with a period of about 12.5 hours due to the moon and a smaller wave with a 12 hour period due to the sun.
We see the total of those two superimposed waves.
I'm unfamiliar with the graphic relationship, which might constitute most heavily on my misunderstanding.
SECONDLY:
Tides don't depend only on the AMOUNT of gravity from a remote body - they depend only on the fact that the gravitational pull from sun/moon on one side of the earth is more than on the other.
So the key factor is the DIFFERENCE between the sun/moon's gravity on one side of the planet versus the other. Since the sun is about 400 times further away than the moon, the difference in distance between the two sides of the planet from the sun is a smaller percentage than that for the moon.
So even though the moon's gravity is FAR less than the sun's in absolute terms, it's proximity to us makes the tides much higher.
I understand that the moon is closer, but even then, the sun's size more than makes up for its poor vicinity, as shown in the equation I used. It should still have a more overwhelming effect on tides, seeing that its gravitational effect is so much higher. Gravitational pull already accounts for the relationship between distance and size. The moon's effect should be 1/179th of the total effect assuming there exist no outside forces apart from the sun and moon, since the sun has 178 times the effect that the moon has.
-
Please create a thread on round earth tides and discuss about it how much you want ;D
This isn't round Earth. This is the relationship between the moon's influence and the sun's influence. Nothing to do with the Earth except for distance between it and the moon and sun. What am I saying that's controversial in the slightest?
nothing you said is controversial, but unless you can use it to answer the question in the OP is an off topic musing :P
It's totally relevant! I'm using facts, not cases specific to the round Earth. If I'm not controversial, then you can use my facts about high tides to apply to the theoretically flat Earth.
-
I understand that the moon is closer, but even then, the sun's size more than makes up for its poor vicinity, as shown in the equation I used.
No - your not looking at the right equation.
The tidal force is the force of gravity pulling on one side versus the other.
I'm a software engineer - so I tend to think more in program code than equations. Here is a program I recently wrote to figure out how much gravity the planet "Trappist-1e" has - but I also calculated the sun and moon's gravity for the Earth to be sure I didn't make an error in my code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h>
// All data sourced from Wikipedia.
const double G = 6.67408e-11 ; // m3 kg−1 s−2
const double AU = 149597870700.0 ; // m
// Solar system:
const double MassSun = 1.98855e30 ; // kg
const double MassEarth = 5.97237e24 ; // kg
const double RadiusEarth = 6371000.0 ; // m
const double OrbitalDistanceEarth = 1.0 * AU ; // m
const double MassMoon = 7.342e22 ; // kg
const double RadiusMoon = 1737000.0 ; // m
const double OrbitalDistanceMoon = 384399000.0 ; // m
const double MassMercury = 0.055 * MassEarth ; // kg
const double RadiusMercury = 0.3829 * RadiusEarth ; // m
const double OrbitalDistanceMercury = 0.387098 * AU ; // m
// Trappist-1 system:
const double MassTrap_1 = 0.0802 * MassSun ; // kg
const double MassTrap_1e = 0.62 * MassEarth ; // kg
const double RadiusTrap_1e = 0.918 * RadiusEarth ; // kg
const double OrbitalDistanceTrap_1e = 0.02817 * AU ; // m
// Math:
double gravity ( double m1, double m2, double r ) // N
{
return m1 * m2 * G / ( r * r ) ;
}
double tidalForce ( double m1, double m2, double orbit, double radius ) // N
{
return gravity ( m1, m2, orbit - radius ) -
gravity ( m1, m2, orbit + radius ) ;
}
int main ( int argc, char **argv )
{
double SolarTideEarth = tidalForce ( MassEarth , MassSun , OrbitalDistanceEarth , RadiusEarth ) ;
double LunarTideEarth = tidalForce ( MassEarth , MassMoon , OrbitalDistanceMoon , RadiusEarth ) ;
double SolarTideMercury = tidalForce ( MassMercury, MassSun , OrbitalDistanceMercury, RadiusMercury ) ;
double SolarTideTrap_1e = tidalForce ( MassTrap_1e, MassTrap_1, OrbitalDistanceTrap_1e, RadiusTrap_1e ) ;
printf ( "Earth Lunar Tidal Force = %0.3e Newtons\n", LunarTideEarth ) ;
printf ( "Earth Solar Tidal Force = %0.3e Newtons\n", SolarTideEarth ) ;
printf ( "Mercury Solar Tidal Force = %0.3e Newtons\n", SolarTideMercury ) ;
printf ( "Trappist 1e Solar Tidal Force = %0.3e Newtons\n", SolarTideTrap_1e ) ;
return 0 ;
}
Basically, I use the standard calculation for the force of gravity at some distance - then calculate the tidal force by doing the calculation twice - once for the near-side of the planet - and again for the far side - then subtracting one from the other to get the total TIDAL force.
The result of this is:
Earth Lunar Tidal Force = 1.314e+19 Newtons
Earth Solar Tidal Force = 6.033e+18 Newtons
Mercury Solar Tidal Force = 2.191e+18 Newtons
Trappist 1e Solar Tidal Force = 1.232e+22 Newtons
So you can see that the moon's tidal force is a little more than twice that of the sun.
It should still have a more overwhelming effect on tides, seeing that its gravitational effect is so much higher. Gravitational pull already accounts for the relationship between distance and size. The moon's effect should be 1/179th of the total effect assuming there exist no outside forces apart from the sun and moon, since the sun has 178 times the effect that the moon has.
Sorry - I don't have the time to explain the physics to you - and this is the wrong place for it anyway.
(Trappist-1e has IMPRESSIVE tides!)
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
Even if it is cubed, that doesn't qualify it as larger than any base number. Sure, the rate of change of a cubed number is much greater than one that is fixed, but mind you, 9 is greater than 2^3. Mass could still potentially make up for the larger distance when it comes to gravitational force, as I demonstrated in the equation I used. But I am incorrect on a different note, one that 3DGeek addressed to me recently.
And by the way, totally irrelevant but still a mistake, in terms of two-body gravity, distance is squared. So, inverse square of the distance. Tidal force should be very close to gravitational force.
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
Indeed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force#Mathematical_treatment
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
Even if it is cubed, that doesn't qualify it as larger than any base number. Sure, the rate of change of a cubed number is much greater than one that is fixed, but mind you, 9 is greater than 2^3. Mass could still potentially make up for the larger distance when it comes to gravitational force, as I demonstrated in the equation I used. But I am incorrect on a different note, one that 3DGeek addressed to me recently.
And by the way, totally irrelevant but still a mistake, in terms of two-body gravity, distance is squared. So, inverse square of the distance. Tidal force should be very close to gravitational force.
No, gravitational force goes as the inverse square. The add-on on top of it from tidal force goes as inverse cube. See the wikipedia article 3DGeek linked, tidal acceleration is approximately 2 (delta R) (GM/R^3) where R is the earth-sun distance and (delta R) is the difference in distance between the earth-sun distance and where the observer is at the surface of the earth. (i.e. at low and high tide, delta R is the radius of globe earth).
The gravitational acceleration is just GM/R^2, which is what you used in your calculation that said that the sun exerts 178 times the gravitational force on the earth than the moon does. If you just take that equation and turn the ^2 to ^3 in both places, you get that the sun exerts 0.45 as much tidal force as the moon does on the earth.
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
Even if it is cubed, that doesn't qualify it as larger than any base number. Sure, the rate of change of a cubed number is much greater than one that is fixed, but mind you, 9 is greater than 2^3. Mass could still potentially make up for the larger distance when it comes to gravitational force, as I demonstrated in the equation I used. But I am incorrect on a different note, one that 3DGeek addressed to me recently.
And by the way, totally irrelevant but still a mistake, in terms of two-body gravity, distance is squared. So, inverse square of the distance. Tidal force should be very close to gravitational force.
No, gravitational force goes as the inverse square. The add-on on top of it from tidal force goes as inverse cube. See the wikipedia article 3DGeek linked, tidal acceleration is approximately 2 (delta R) (GM/R^3) where R is the earth-sun distance and (delta R) is the difference in distance between the earth-sun distance and where the observer is at the surface of the earth. (i.e. at low and high tide, delta R is the radius of globe earth).
The gravitational acceleration is just GM/R^2, which is what you used in your calculation that said that the sun exerts 178 times the gravitational force on the earth than the moon does. If you just take that equation and turn the ^2 to ^3 in both places, you get that the sun exerts 0.45 as much tidal force as the moon does on the earth.
Ah. I apologize for being stubborn. I haven't learned that yet, I thought there wasn't a difference between force on tidal waves and bodies of planets. It's proportional, but of course, not equivalent.
-
Tidal force depends on the inverse CUBE of the distance. The overall gravity force depends on the SQUARE OF THE DISTANCE. So no, the distance is not "more than made up for" by the large mass of the sun.
Even if it is cubed, that doesn't qualify it as larger than any base number. Sure, the rate of change of a cubed number is much greater than one that is fixed, but mind you, 9 is greater than 2^3. Mass could still potentially make up for the larger distance when it comes to gravitational force, as I demonstrated in the equation I used. But I am incorrect on a different note, one that 3DGeek addressed to me recently.
And by the way, totally irrelevant but still a mistake, in terms of two-body gravity, distance is squared. So, inverse square of the distance. Tidal force should be very close to gravitational force.
No, gravitational force goes as the inverse square. The add-on on top of it from tidal force goes as inverse cube. See the wikipedia article 3DGeek linked, tidal acceleration is approximately 2 (delta R) (GM/R^3) where R is the earth-sun distance and (delta R) is the difference in distance between the earth-sun distance and where the observer is at the surface of the earth. (i.e. at low and high tide, delta R is the radius of globe earth).
The gravitational acceleration is just GM/R^2, which is what you used in your calculation that said that the sun exerts 178 times the gravitational force on the earth than the moon does. If you just take that equation and turn the ^2 to ^3 in both places, you get that the sun exerts 0.45 as much tidal force as the moon does on the earth.
Ah. I apologize for being stubborn. I haven't learned that yet, I thought there wasn't a difference between force on tidal waves and bodies of planets. It's proportional, but of course, not equivalent.
This has probably reached the point of off-topicness. Revel - you are CLEARLY wrong - and everyone is telling you so. It's time you went and asked the question you have on some RET forum where you'll get a good answer. May I recommend either the Wikipedia science desk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science) or the Quora section on Tides (https://www.quora.com/search?q=Tides).
The thing you're STILL failing to understand is that tidal forces depend on the ratio of the size of the 'target' (Earth in this case) to the distance from the source (the Sun or Moon) - that ratio is a TINY number for the Sun and BIG number for the Moon - and that difference by FAR outweighs the Sun's larger mass.
But either way - this is not the place for this debate. We're really discussing how FlatEarth physics explains tides ("badly" being the only answer I've seen so far!) and not your personal failure to understand RET physics.
-
What haven't I understood? You just taught me that gravitational force is not equally distributed across the Earth, since it is not a point, but a 3-dimensional object. Therefore, tidal force takes into account the strongest portion of the Earth that receives gravitational force: the nearest part of the Earth. That's why the two entities could be considered, to a good degree, proportional. But you're right, I digress.
-
Just as the J-Man of God has explained, NASA has now had to get on board the truth and reveal as J-Man did here first, for the readers, that in fact, the Earth Breathes.....
https://www.space.com/38806-nasa-satellites-watch-earth-breathe-video.html
The video shows Earth "breathing"
===========
Probably not a good Idea to mess with the WORD....
-
Just as the J-Man of God has explained, NASA has now had to get on board the truth and reveal as J-Man did here first, for the readers, that in fact, the Earth Breathes.....
https://www.space.com/38806-nasa-satellites-watch-earth-breathe-video.html
The video shows Earth "breathing"
===========
Probably not a good Idea to mess with the WORD....
LOL
First of all they are not talking about tides, at all, anywhere on the page. As usual, you see a web page with one word you think agrees with you and you post it. Did you read it?
Second of all, you are posting a compilation of satellite data because you think it agrees with you (they used the word breathe!). But you don't believe in NASA or satellites. Why do you do this? Oh, I remember. FE faithful accept anything they think agrees with them without thought, and claims everything that disagrees with them is fake.
My theory must be true if I ignore everything that says otherwise. It's like arguing with a child. Or maybe that's just what it is.
-
Lets see you replicate a globe with 1/4 inch of water on it that sticks while you spin it. We'll wait....begin
Thank you all, especially qeek for confirming you can't replicate it, not here, not in outer space. It's all BS water sticking to a ball.
Breathe deep God, the tides work great like old faithful.
I'll get right on that after you prove anything you said about the Earth breathing tides.
Seriously, no one could actually be this ignorant. I guess you just like trolling for sake of trolling.
Add one to the FE response standard plan.
Option 1:Derail by changing subject.
Option 2:Ignore.
Option 3:Derail by suggesting something so stupid everyone forgets the original subject.
Mtnman just can't handle the truth. He is shocked that his beloved satanist NASA has said the earth breathes. And yes it will come out soon that this is in fact the delivery of tidal changes....
Carry on. Slash bonk kick
This is J-Man !
-
The video shows Earth "breathing"
....
Do they not have metaphors on your home planet? The video is clearly described as showing the yearly cycle of plant life increasing and decreasing with the seasons. This is about as far away from your notion of the Earth breathing twice a day to explain tides as a Volkswagen beetle is from a Saturn V.
Oh sorry, that was also a metaphor. What I mean is: you are completely misrepresenting the video. Is this intentional on your part?
-
The video shows Earth "breathing"
....
Do they not have metaphors on your home planet? The video is clearly described as showing the yearly cycle of plant life increasing and decreasing with the seasons. This is about as far away from your notion of the Earth breathing twice a day to explain tides as a Volkswagen beetle is from a Saturn V.
Oh sorry, that was also a metaphor. What I mean is: you are completely misrepresenting the video. Is this intentional on your part?
He saw a word he liked on a page with sciencey stuff, nothing deeper than that.
-
Mtnman just can't handle the truth. He is shocked that his beloved satanist NASA has said the earth breathes. And yes it will come out soon that this is in fact the delivery of tidal changes....
Carry on. Slash bonk kick
This is J-Man !
The truth? You just posted a link with video from NASA, which you don't believe in. Showing images from a satellite, which you don't believe in. Showing images of a round Earth, which you don't believe in. All because they used the word "breathe".
So if this proves the Earth breathes, then it also proves NASA filmed the round Earth with a satellite. So do you believe all these things now?
-
Mtnman just can't handle the truth. He is shocked that his beloved satanist NASA has said the earth breathes. And yes it will come out soon that this is in fact the delivery of tidal changes....
Carry on. Slash bonk kick
This is J-Man !
The truth? You just posted a link with video from NASA, which you don't believe in. Showing images from a satellite, which you don't believe in. Showing images of a round Earth, which you don't believe in. All because they used the word "breathe".
So if this proves the Earth breathes, then it also proves NASA filmed the round Earth with a satellite. So do you believe all these things now?
Really? It's obvious NASA monitors my posts here and loved my breathing exercise debate and decided to use it. You can't have like 3 people on this site offering FE examples and 10 arguing against for RE and not have a NASA JPL or dirty 3 digit .org posting along here. They took my stuff back and used it in shop. CGI shop.....
Besides J-man's explanation of the "Breathing Earth" I doubt you can google it anywhere and find it in cyber space. God invented it and I relayed it. Can't happen.
-
Mtnman just can't handle the truth. He is shocked that his beloved satanist NASA has said the earth breathes. And yes it will come out soon that this is in fact the delivery of tidal changes....
Carry on. Slash bonk kick
This is J-Man !
The truth? You just posted a link with video from NASA, which you don't believe in. Showing images from a satellite, which you don't believe in. Showing images of a round Earth, which you don't believe in. All because they used the word "breathe".
So if this proves the Earth breathes, then it also proves NASA filmed the round Earth with a satellite. So do you believe all these things now?
Really? It's obvious NASA monitors my posts here and loved my breathing exercise debate and decided to use it. You can't have like 3 people on this site offering FE examples and 10 arguing against for RE and not have a NASA JPL or dirty 3 digit .org posting along here. They took my stuff back and used it in shop. CGI shop.....
Besides J-man's explanation of the "Breathing Earth" I doubt you can google it anywhere and find it in cyber space. God invented it and I relayed it. Can't happen.
That's some serious delusion there. Like anyone at NASA would care about these ridiculous discussions. But sure, NASA read read your post a few weeks ago, and decided to launch that satellite in 1997, which I strongly suspect was before you were born.