[shumy]

Ok, earth is flat and a disk. Let's see at where does your imagination goes.
I will edit this post when adding new questions.
1. What's on the other side?
2. Earth is a flat disk, is the sun, moon, jupiter or other space objects all flat disks?
    If they are, it's real luck that all of them face exactly to the same side so that we can see a circle.
    If not, does it means we have 2 different sets of laws that govern the universe?

[Pongo]

It's unknown as no one has ever seen it.  However, one of the popular theories is that there is a lot of super heated rock down there.

[shumy]

It's unknown as no one has ever seen it.  However, one of the popular theories is that there is a lot of super heated rock down there.

OK, in this theory I suppose there must be some frontier? Or is it a infinit bed of heated rock?

[Benjamin Franklin]

2. Earth is a flat disk, is the sun, moon, jupiter or other space objects all flat disks?
    If they are, it's real luck that all of them face exactly to the same side so that we can see a circle.
    If not, does it means we have 2 different sets of laws that govern the universe?

They look pretty round to me. I don't see why this means there are two different sets of laws that govern the universe. Stars are round, the Earth is not.

[Tau]

It's unknown as no one has ever seen it.  However, one of the popular theories is that there is a lot of super heated rock down there.

OK, in this theory I suppose there must be some frontier? Or is it a infinit bed of heated rock?

It ends at some point. The Earth is accelerating upwards, and something with infinite mass cannot accelerate.

[Dog]

It ends at some point. The Earth is accelerating upwards, and something with infinite mass cannot accelerate.

Except the Earth isn't accelerating. The Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/(s^2). If we've been accelerating that much since the formation of the Earth.... or actually I'll make it easy on you and chop off a billion years...... then the Earth would be travelling at 1.1*(10^18) meters per second right now. That is about ten times the magnitude of the speed of light. I think that's a problem...

[juner]

It ends at some point. The Earth is accelerating upwards, and something with infinite mass cannot accelerate.

Except the Earth isn't accelerating. The Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/(s^2). If we've been accelerating that much since the formation of the Earth.... or actually I'll make it easy on you and chop off a billion years...... then the Earth would be travelling at 1.1*(10^18) meters per second right now. That is about ten times the magnitude of the speed of light. I think that's a problem...

Incorrect.

[alex]

If you claim a statement to be 'incorrect' without further explanation, this is an obvious non-scientific statement. If you want to contribute to this discussion, please stay focussed and try to explain, why you think the claim is incorrect.

[jroa]

If you claim a statement to be 'incorrect' without further explanation, this is an obvious non-scientific statement. If you want to contribute to this discussion, please stay focussed and try to explain, why you think the claim is incorrect.

Incorrect. 

[alex]

Interesting. I assume you have nothing more to say then, so I asume my statements made earlier are correct.

This thread can be closed.

[Dog]

It ends at some point. The Earth is accelerating upwards, and something with infinite mass cannot accelerate.

Except the Earth isn't accelerating. The Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/(s^2). If we've been accelerating that much since the formation of the Earth.... or actually I'll make it easy on you and chop off a billion years...... then the Earth would be travelling at 1.1*(10^18) meters per second right now. That is about ten times the magnitude of the speed of light. I think that's a problem...

Incorrect.

K.




We'll you see the problem with your rebuttal is that....................... oh wait you don't have one 
Therefore my statement still stands uncontested.

[jroa]

It ends at some point. The Earth is accelerating upwards, and something with infinite mass cannot accelerate.

Except the Earth isn't accelerating. The Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/(s^2). If we've been accelerating that much since the formation of the Earth.... or actually I'll make it easy on you and chop off a billion years...... then the Earth would be travelling at 1.1*(10^18) meters per second right now. That is about ten times the magnitude of the speed of light. I think that's a problem...

Incorrect.

K.




We'll you see the problem with your rebuttal is that....................... oh wait you don't have one 
Therefore my statement still stands uncontested.

First of all, you make assumptions about the age of the Earth.  No big deal, but they are still assumptions.  Next, you assume the speed of light.  Again, not a big deal.  However, next you assume that Newtonian physics can work for something more than you driving to the store.  Newtonian physics has been known for more than a century to be incorrect, yet, you preach it like a cult member.  Special Relativity will show you that you can accelerate indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.  Therefore, incorrect.

[Dog]

First of all, you make assumptions about the age of the Earth.  No big deal, but they are still assumptions.  Next, you assume the speed of light.  Again, not a big deal.  However, next you assume that Newtonian physics can work for something more than you driving to the store.  Newtonian physics has been known for more than a century to be incorrect, yet, you preach it like a cult member.  Special Relativity will show you that you can accelerate indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.  Therefore, incorrect.

The age of the Earth and the speed of light have been verified by many scientists and researchers all over. Special relativity is a little more complicated area of physics, where things get complicated very fast. I find it funny you accept S.R. but not the age of the Earth or c 

Anyways, can you be a little more specific on the part of S.R. that specifies what you are claiming?

[jroa]

First of all, you make assumptions about the age of the Earth.  No big deal, but they are still assumptions.  Next, you assume the speed of light.  Again, not a big deal.  However, next you assume that Newtonian physics can work for something more than you driving to the store.  Newtonian physics has been known for more than a century to be incorrect, yet, you preach it like a cult member.  Special Relativity will show you that you can accelerate indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.  Therefore, incorrect.

The age of the Earth and the speed of light have been verified by many scientists and researchers all over. Special relativity is a little more complicated area of physics, where things get complicated very fast. I find it funny you accept S.R. but not the age of the Earth or c 

Anyways, can you be a little more specific on the part of S.R. that specifies what you are claiming?

Are you asking for the SR acceleration formulas?  I can give you those.

[jroa]

Here you go. 

v = c tanh(r/c)

As you can see, v will never be more than c. 

[alex]

Where does this equation come from. Or do you just know it from looking out of your window?

[spoon]

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/acceleration.html

Literally google search "relativity acceleration", you will find countless legit sources. This one isn't long, and it completely supports what jroa said.

[alex]

I am surprised! I always thought that scientific insights/laws/theories are considered incorrect in this forum.

(spoon: sorry if you are a 'normal' person, i.e. a person having no doubt the earth is round...)

This means that a quite new concept is used to satisfy some unrelated insane and ridocoluos assumption, that the 'flat' earth is 'accelerating' 'upwards'. I guess even a little child will see that this chain of arguments is complete unlogical.

[Pete Svarrior]

I am surprised! I always thought that scientific insights/laws/theories are considered incorrect in this forum.

(spoon: sorry if you are a 'normal' person, i.e. a person having no doubt the earth is round...)

Please refrain from non-contributive posting in the upper fora. This is the second incident where I have to step in, and this time I am issuing a proper warning.

In addition, please refrain from resorting to personal insults in the upper fora.

[alex]

Let me rephrase my comment:

Is it correct that flat-earth believers do not believe in gravity, but believe in special relativity?