[flatearthisscience]

Ok guys, I've been doing some investigations and I've dedicated the past 2 months to researching the mathematics of the Earth and something about gravity just didn't add up.

Ok so here's the theory. Because mathematically, a flat surface is just a sphere of infinite radius, let's assume that the Earth is a sphere of infinite radius which would make it flat. Here's the thing, if we use Newton's law of universal gravitation, we get:

g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2

Now, we see that because r approaches to infinity, M also approaches to infinity. Applying l'hopital's rule by taking the derivative of the numerator and the denominator gives us that the acceleration due to gravity is infinity. Obviously, this is false.

Then, I considered the fact that the Earth is modeled as a hollow sphere - if we have the density of Earth is p, then we get:
M (mass) = p*4*pi*r^2

then, we have acceleration due to gravity g=G*p*4*pi*r^2/r^2

cancelling r^2, we have acceleration g = G*p*4*pi

So, we now know that gravity only depends on the average density of Earth.

Now, when you think about it, the government says that there is this thing called "pressure" - which is why we can't dig too deep - but what if that's actually because Earth is a hollow sphere of infinite radius, which means it's just a flat surface hovering over nothingness. That's why the government says that we can't dig deeper than a certain amount because the pressure is too big - pressure is actually not real, it's a ploy to stop us from finding the truth.

So when you see something about NASA officials taking lie detector tests that prove the Earth is a sphere, remember that this is just semantics - Earth is a sphere, but it has infinite radius which means that it effectively is a flat surface.

[ChrisTP]

If you want to dispute pressure increasing the the further down you go, perhaps test that by diving down as far as you can in water. You'll find pressure is very real the deeper you go.

Disclaimer: please make sure you're trained to do this, it doesn't take much to qualify but you can seriously get hurt if you don't get lessons.

[flatearthisscience]

If you want to dispute pressure increasing the the further down you go, perhaps test that by diving down as far as you can in water. You'll find pressure is very real the deeper you go.

Disclaimer: please make sure you're trained to do this, it doesn't take much to qualify but you can seriously get hurt if you don't get lessons.

The difference is water pressure occurs because water is pressing down on you and that's where the force comes from. When you dig a hole in the Earth, there is nothing that is pushing down on you so pressure as a concept is flawed because it's just weight from things on top of you.

[Aubrey Dennis]

Interesting theory - I don't quite buy into the fact that gravity exists yet but still it's interesting to see some mathematical evidence that the Earth is flat. This way maybe we are accepted into the more "mainstream" where this theory can really gain traction. I think this is interesting and holds a lot of potential.

[stack]

Now, when you think about it, the government says that there is this thing called "pressure" - which is why we can't dig too deep - but what if that's actually because Earth is a hollow sphere of infinite radius, which means it's just a flat surface hovering over nothingness. That's why the government says that we can't dig deeper than a certain amount because the pressure is too big - pressure is actually not real, it's a ploy to stop us from finding the truth.

I did think about it and I don't remember the government saying there is a thing called "pressure". And I don't remember the government stopping me from digging a deep hole because of pressure. Any references you can cite showing that the government invented "pressure"?

So when you see something about NASA officials taking lie detector tests that prove the Earth is a sphere, remember that this is just semantics - Earth is a sphere, but it has infinite radius which means that it effectively is a flat surface.

I haven't seen any NASA officials taking lie detector tests. Have you?

[flatearthisscience]

Now, when you think about it, the government says that there is this thing called "pressure" - which is why we can't dig too deep - but what if that's actually because Earth is a hollow sphere of infinite radius, which means it's just a flat surface hovering over nothingness. That's why the government says that we can't dig deeper than a certain amount because the pressure is too big - pressure is actually not real, it's a ploy to stop us from finding the truth.

I did think about it and I don't remember the government saying there is a thing called "pressure". And I don't remember the government stopping me from digging a deep hole because of pressure. Any references you can cite showing that the government invented "pressure"?

So when you see something about NASA officials taking lie detector tests that prove the Earth is a sphere, remember that this is just semantics - Earth is a sphere, but it has infinite radius which means that it effectively is a flat surface.

I haven't seen any NASA officials taking lie detector tests. Have you?

There are limits to how deep we can dig for example the government limits most of their underground infrastructure to a certain depth - I think the deepest place on Earth people have been is around 12 kilometers below sea level. The justification given for this is the idea of "pressure". I think this concept is flawed because as I have explained, the reason you feel pressure in water is because of the weight of the water that is in contact with you whereas that doesn't exist for digging deeper into the ground so why have humans never been deeper than 12 kilometers below sea level? Even official government records say that the crust of Earth is about 30 kilometers so there would be no problem going deeper than 12 kilometers.

I raised the NASA thing as an anecdote of how government officials can use a variety of semantics to get around allegations of lying if the truth ever becomes widely accepted - it wasn't meant to be taken literally I just wanted to express the fact that you shouldn't always trust the fact that government officials are giving you the truth.

[flatearthisscience]

Interesting theory - I don't quite buy into the fact that gravity exists yet but still it's interesting to see some mathematical evidence that the Earth is flat. This way maybe we are accepted into the more "mainstream" where this theory can really gain traction. I think this is interesting and holds a lot of potential.

Thanks for the comment and support! I think that the idea that gravity exists might be kind of hard to accept for some FEr's, but I still think that my model is correct.

Thanks for the support though!

[TomFoolery]

Interesting theory - I don't quite buy into the fact that gravity exists yet but still it's interesting to see some mathematical evidence that the Earth is flat. This way maybe we are accepted into the more "mainstream" where this theory can really gain traction. I think this is interesting and holds a lot of potential.

Thanks for the comment and support! I think that the idea that gravity exists might be kind of hard to accept for some FEr's, but I still think that my model is correct.

Thanks for the support though!

I modeled the back side of the flat earth (in ferrowax) using the shape of it's magnetic field, and it does look kind of like that, but maybe magnetism is the force instead of gravity.

[stack]

Now, when you think about it, the government says that there is this thing called "pressure" - which is why we can't dig too deep - but what if that's actually because Earth is a hollow sphere of infinite radius, which means it's just a flat surface hovering over nothingness. That's why the government says that we can't dig deeper than a certain amount because the pressure is too big - pressure is actually not real, it's a ploy to stop us from finding the truth.

I did think about it and I don't remember the government saying there is a thing called "pressure". And I don't remember the government stopping me from digging a deep hole because of pressure. Any references you can cite showing that the government invented "pressure"?

So when you see something about NASA officials taking lie detector tests that prove the Earth is a sphere, remember that this is just semantics - Earth is a sphere, but it has infinite radius which means that it effectively is a flat surface.

I haven't seen any NASA officials taking lie detector tests. Have you?

There are limits to how deep we can dig for example the government limits most of their underground infrastructure to a certain depth - I think the deepest place on Earth people have been is around 12 kilometers below sea level. The justification given for this is the idea of "pressure". I think this concept is flawed because as I have explained, the reason you feel pressure in water is because of the weight of the water that is in contact with you whereas that doesn't exist for digging deeper into the ground so why have humans never been deeper than 12 kilometers below sea level? Even official government records say that the crust of Earth is about 30 kilometers so there would be no problem going deeper than 12 kilometers.

Which official government records are these?

I raised the NASA thing as an anecdote of how government officials can use a variety of semantics to get around allegations of lying if the truth ever becomes widely accepted - it wasn't meant to be taken literally I just wanted to express the fact that you shouldn't always trust the fact that government officials are giving you the truth.

If you are going to be anecdotal then state that you are being anecdotal.

[OhBoy]

Oh yes also,
 
Lipotals rule should not be used unless you have a intermediate form in the limit you are taking.

Also good job on the statement that "a plane is a sphere with infinite radius", but you can't use that like you have because it doesn't even make physical sense. If you want further reading on it this seems to be a good discussion.
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/82220/a-circle-with-infinite-radius-is-a-line

[sandokhan]

All of you here are assuming that terrestrial gravity is attractive, and it is not.

That is why the equations presented here, including the infinite earth plane hypothesis, are not correct.

You have to explain the attractive mechanism in order to claim that F=GMm/r^2.

[AATW]

You have to explain the attractive mechanism in order to claim that F=GMm/r^2.

No, you don’t.
You said this before, it was wrong then and it’s wrong now. I do NOT have to understand the mechanism behind an effect to observe that the effect exists.

Rainbows didn’t only start existing when we understood the way sunlight reflects and refracts through water drops to cause the effect. To understand the mechanism is desirable but it is not a prerequisite to understanding an effect exists.

[Max_Almond]

Ok so here's the theory. Because mathematically, a flat surface is just a sphere of infinite radius, let's assume that the Earth is a sphere of infinite radius which would make it flat.

Yeah, but...flat earthers don't propose that the Earth is an infinite sphere; and they don't believe in gravity; and we know without question that the Earth isn't an infinite sphere.

Everything following that, then, based on assuming that the Earth is an infinite sphere is bound to be in error.

That probably explains why your model doesn't work.

[OhBoy]

It still alludes me why people dismiss gravity because of their beliefs 

[Max_Almond]

Alludes or eludes?

Gravity is incompatible with the flat earth belief: that's why it has to be dismissed, as do all things that are incompatible with the belief.

Notice that aspects of science that aren't incompatible with flat earth belief aren't attacked and dismissed.

[OhBoy]

**I meant I cannot process

I just have a different world view I guess. Someones belief has no effect on the truth of reality, regardless if they can understand or process how thing are.

But there will always be irrational people so yeet :// 

[Pulad1949]

Sorry for my forcefulness but, you have no idea of math. Let's review the formulas used.

Newton's law of universal gravitation
g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2

this formula is not complete, because you have to take into account the mass of the two bodies [g (acceleration due to gravity) = G*M1*M2/r^2], but suppose it's okay

Complete non sense
M (mass) = p*4*pi*r^2

I guess this formula comes from D = m / v, but 4*pi*r^2 is the formula of the area of a sphere, not the volumen. Ahm, okey the round earth model isn't correct name of the model, it must be the round void earth. ok...

We apply this formula to the previous.

g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2 ;
g (acceleration due to gravity) = G(D*4*pi*r^2)/r^2;

Can u see the difference? Please, iIf you do not know about a topic, you should study about it before speaking, as this can lead to confusion for many people.

You are welcome

[TomFoolery]

All of you here are assuming that terrestrial gravity is attractive, and it is not.

That is why the equations presented here, including the infinite earth plane hypothesis, are not correct.

You have to explain the attractive mechanism in order to claim that F=GMm/r^2.

Hey I really need your help. I'm trying my best to disprove that terrestrial gravity is attractive, but you see I got these lead weights and they are hanging and well you know the drill, but the more refined I make my apparatus, the more it looks like the movable lead weights are attracted to the fixed lead weights. My videos are here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=13661.msg183727#msg183727

I was only introduced to flat earth a couple months ago, so  I really need help here.

Shouldn't my mobile lead weights show no attraction to the fixed lead weights?

Thank you very much for any help you can offer!

[BillO]

Ok guys, I've been doing some investigations and I've dedicated the past 2 months to researching the mathematics of the Earth and something about gravity just didn't add up.

Okay, let's have a look...

Ok so here's the theory. Because mathematically, a flat surface is just a sphere of infinite radius, let's assume that the Earth is a sphere of infinite radius which would make it flat. Here's the thing, if we use Newton's law of universal gravitation, we get:

g (acceleration due to gravity) = GM/r^2

Now, we see that because r approaches to infinity, M also approaches to infinity. Applying l'hopital's rule by taking the derivative of the numerator and the denominator gives us that the acceleration due to gravity is infinity. Obviously, this is false.

Why is this false?  Also, you don't need to apply L'Hopital's rule here:

Since the mass of a sphere is given by: M = D*4/3*pi*r³, where D is the density.

Therefore g=piGD*4/3*r, which indeed does go to infinity as r goes to infinity.

And this is exactly what we would expect.  So far, both your math and your reasoning are very suspect.

Then, I considered the fact that the Earth is modeled as a hollow sphere - if we have the density of Earth is p, then we get:
M (mass) = p*4*pi*r^2

No, this is just not right.  Do you have any corroborating links to show us that any credible source agrees the earth can be modeled as a hollow sphere?

.... {gobildy-gook cut} ...

So, we now know that gravity only depends on the average density of Earth.

Nope.  See above.  Gravity, or more correctly acceleration due to gravity, for a given spherical body depends on density and radius of the body and a constant equal to 4piG/3.

Now, when you ... {more gobildy-gook ...} flat surface.

Well, it seems your reasoning and math don't pan out.  So, regardless of the government (which government? ) lying you have not demonstrated anything except the fact that you don't understand simple physics any better than any other flat earther.