[Theguru]

I would like to offer a suggestion as to a realtively simple experiment which would definitively prove the flat earth theory.

 

It involves sending a laser beam signal along the length of the Pontchartrain Causeway and measuring the height of the beam above the water line at various intervals.

 

The laser would have to be very powerful with a highly concentrated beam such that it would only have very minimal dispersion at large distances, such as a medical grade laser.

The laser would be set at a known height above the road surface, with the beam exactly parallel with the water below. There are numerous self levelling devices or electronic spirit levels that can achieve this with a high degree of accuracy.

 

 

At various intervals along the Causeway the height of the beam is measured above the water level.

With a convex water surface, this height should progressively rise the further along the Causeway that the beam is measured.

 

In order to account for tidal variation there would need to be a series of teams along the Causeway at various intervals, say 1 mile, 5 miles and 10 miles.

At the beginning of the experiment all groups would simultaneously measure the height of the road surface above the water line. This would account for variations in the height of the Causeway at that point and/or tidal variations.

The laser is then beamed down the Causeway and the height above the road surface is measured at various intervals. The height above the water level therefore becomes: height of road surface above water level plus height of beam above the road.

If this value is constant at all intervals then the water surface below the laser is dead flat.

 

The experiment would be a logistical challenge involving numerous people and would probably include closing at least one lane of the Causeway.

In addition, a high grade laser would need to be sourced and mounted on a very stable self levelling device.

 

However, this experiment would provide very accurate and compelling data, and possibly definitely prove the flat earth theory.

 


 

[Rayzor]

You don't especially need a laser,  you just need a good theodolite.   Ask your local surveyor.

[Theguru]

Thanks Rayzor, I agree.
I think a definitive experiment would involve a laser and theodolite side by side.
What do you think about the design of the experiment? Any flaws?

[Rayzor]

Thanks Rayzor, I agree.
I think a definitive experiment would involve a laser and theodolite side by side.
What do you think about the design of the experiment? Any flaws?

I think it sounds pretty good,  the only thing I'd perhaps change would be to set the measurement points at a fixed height above the water rather than referencing the road surface.   The aim of the experiment is to measure if the surface of the water is curved or flat.   If it's flat and all the points are the same height above the water, then looking through the theodolite, they will all lie along a straight line.   If it's curved then the ones in the intermediate locations will be higher.

Getting the laser focussed to produce a small enough dot at the end point might be tricky,  depends on the laser being used I guess?

[Wezzoid]

Using two different colour lasers should allow refraction effects to be detected?

[model 29]

The laser will be affected by the same refractive/mirage effects that are already seen.

Several small 'towers' 20-30 feet high, mounted on floats, and positioned at intervals along a length of water would be better.  The tops will align if Earth is flat.  There will be a 'hump' however along the tops if Earth is round.

[Theguru]

You are correct Rayzor, the height of the laser above the water line is the key determinant.
I tried to make this point in the original post but perhaps was not that clear.

I suggested to perform a control measurement of distance from road to water surface in order to make the subsequent measurement of laser to water surface less cumbersome.
Given that the laser is likely to be pointed down the middle of the road, direct measurement from laser beam to water surface will be difficult.
However, if distance from water surface to road is known then simply the additional height of the beam above the road can be added then you have total height of laser beam above the water surface.

In terms of equipment and measurement errors, the aim will be to minimise them and factor them in to the margin for a statistically significant result.

A 1000mw laser available over the internet disperses approximately 12 inches over 6 miles. See this video from jeranism at 23.30:

Top of the range self levelling devices are reported to be accurate to 30cm per 10000m (sorry about the metric).

So therefore over about 6 miles the error will be +/- 18 inches.

However, over 6 miles, the expected height difference in water surface to laser (if the earth is curved) should be at least a few yards depending on what number you use for the radius of the earth.

In essence, if the height of the beam above the water line is +/_  12 inches over 6 miles then the water and beam are parallel.

In terms of optical interference, the Causeway looks 5 or 6 yards above sea level, which is approximately the 20-30 feet you talk about model 29. Therefore, refraction from heat and or mirage effects should be minimal.

In terms of the theodolite, I think it is an excellent idea to have this in parallel with the laser in order to confirm that there has been no refraction of the laser beam.
I still think the laser is a good idea given that this is a visible point that can be seen by all observers. In the presence of some very sceptical people this will show that the results are real, as opposed to a viewer looking through a single theodolite, which may be subject to criticism of observer bias.

Food for thought…any and all criticisms very, very welcome.

There some very intelligent people on here better versed at physics than me so if there are some flaws in my experiment I would love to hear them.

If not, and the principles are robust, then maybe the FES can perform the experiment and give the world some concrete proof once and for all

[Theguru]

Anyone?

I'm looking for faults in the experiment.
If it can't be faulted then the FES should set about organising the experiment.
It is possibly the Holy Grail the society is looking for

[Hoppy]

Anyone?

I'm looking for faults in the experiment.
If it can't be faulted then the FES should set about organising the experiment.
It is possibly the Holy Grail the society is looking for

Hey dude, go do the experiment and let us know how it turns out. In my experience laser beams diffuse on long distances. Jeranism onyoutube has a laser experment over water. Look at that before you waste your time.

[Theguru]

Hey Hoppy, scroll up a few inches and you'll see that I've posted the Jeranism video you are talking about.
The laser they use disperses about 12 inches over 6 miles, perfectly acceptable.

I think the earth is a sphere so why would I want to prove it's flat?

However, I have devised an experiment that attempts to quantify the degree of curvature of the lake.
If it has flaws then I'm keen to hear them...but as you can see, nobody seems to have come up with any, and I'm confident they won't.

So therefore if the FES are serious, as a society, they should make an attempt to conduct the experiment.
It could give them all the evidence they are looking for.
If they choose not, then maybe they're not so serious about proving the earth flat after all

[Rayzor]

Here's another idea,  that could be used for a quick check.     

One person is located on the causeway ( out of the traffic ) with a uhf-cb radio and a video camera with a good zoom lens mounted 5' above the roadway. 
A second person is in a car with a second uhf-cb radio and the laser mounted 5' above the road and pointing back at the observer,  the car then drives away from the camera.

When the stationary observer with the zoom lens can no longer see the laser,  he calls the car on the radio and  the driver notes the distance the car has travelled.   

Assuming the video camera and the laser are about 5' above the road surface and the road surface follows the water surface, more or less,  then  the laser should not be visible when the car is more than about 9-10 km or so away.   (  6 miles )

Allowing for some forward scattering and refraction, you might get a few k's more,  but not the full 38 km ( 24 miles )

So if the laser can't be seen after about  9-10 km (6 miles)  or more the earth is curved.  If the earth is flat  ( and the laser powerful enough ) the laser should be visible all the way across the 38km.

You should make sure the observer has the proper laser filter glasses, so as to avoid eye damage if he inadvertently looks at the laser directly.

Be sure to post the video on youtube.

PS  Formula used  C+R = 0.574*d²    or if you prefer 5/0.574 = 8.71 = d²,  d (miles) = 2.95 miles to the mid point.  This allows for the standard 1/7 for downwards refraction of the sight line.
So with both ends of the sight line 5' off the road surface you should get 6 miles or so.  Of course if the earth is flat, you should get all the way across, the full 24 miles.

EDIT:  Looking at pictures of the bridge, there is a rise in the roadway,  probably for shipping,  so you wouldn't actually be able to see all the way even if the earth was flat. 
http://www.thecauseway.us/ So you need to work out which side has the longest flat section before the shipping channel and see if it's long enough to do the experiment.   

[Theguru]

Similar concept Rayzor.
Calculating the "levelness" of a standing body of water is the entire premise of the FES.
If the FES wants to prove the world of the grand spherical earth conspiracy this is what they need to do.

Any low lying, dead straight and sufficiently long bridge will do...just so happens that the Pontchartrain Causeway is right in the backyard of the home of the FES.
Some similar bridges in China would probably be suitable.

Another alternative is to approach a Louisiana University and ask them to conduct a graduate field experiment to calculate the curvature of Lake Pontchatrain and therefore the earth.
If (when!) the university calculate that the lake is flat then they'll publish the results. A university study in a peer reviewed journal will have some clout.

Just some suggestions for the FES, hopefully they are taken in the correct way

[Pongo]

I think the earth is a sphere so why would I want to prove it's flat?

Classic round-earth thought process. "I've been told that the earth is a sphere so why would I ever do anything whatsoever to verify what I've been told?"

Imagine if this applied to all fields of study:
"I think leeches cure diseases so why would I want to prove they don't?"
"I think cars are safe enough without airbags so why would I want to prove they aren't?"
"I think that lead is safe to consume so why would I want to prove that it isn't?"

[Theguru]

You raise a good point Pongo.

Why does anyone want to prove the earth is flat?
If proof is indeed established what will the consequences be?

I am open minded to the idea. I certainly think it is possible.

Before you label me a "round earther" remember that I have provided a legitimate suggestion as to how the FES may indeed prove the world is flat.

The principles of the experiment are valid but the implementation is quite involved.
The FES may wish to take this concept to a university or to actually conduct the experiment themselves.
It could be the critical piece of evidence they are looking for.

[Rayzor]

Classic round-earth thought process. "I've been told that the earth is a sphere so why would I ever do anything whatsoever to verify what I've been told?"

Not true,   The hypothesis is:  The Earth is flat.     Now we design an experiment to prove or disprove the hypothesis,  the experiment needs to be carefully designed so as to avoid other factors which could distort the results.  Factors like refraction can lead to false results,  so the experiment needs to be designed to avoid those factors.

I did some more investigation into the Pontchartrain Causeway,   and I suspect the flat sections between the humps for the shipping channels might not be long enough.  Ideally we need  something like 10 miles flat.

[Theguru]

Rayzor, you can approach the hypothesis from either direction ie proving that the flat earth is spherical or vice versa.
The problem for the FES is that the belief that the earth is a sphere is so utterly engrained throughout society that the onus is on the FES to prove it is flat.

In terms of the causeway, I think it has significantly long stretches that are flat in order to gain a statistically significant result.
By my calculations, there should be approximately a 3 yard height difference the between the laser and the water surface (compared to the initial height) at a distance of 4 miles from the origin of the beam.
This difference should be plenty, given that equipment and measurement errors of the laser are only likely to be a few 1-2 feet at 4 miles.

Bottom line is this: do you want to prove to the rest of the world that the earth is truly flat? If so then you need to be channeling you're energies into experiments like the one I'm describing.
If you are happy in your beliefs and don't feel the need to prove anything to anybody then don't bother

[Pete Svarrior]

The hypothesis is:  The Earth is flat.     Now we design an experiment to prove or disprove the hypothesis,  the experiment needs to be carefully designed so as to avoid other factors which could distort the results.

How does this follow from what Pongo was responding to?

I think the earth is a sphere so why would I want to prove it's flat?

[Rayzor]

The hypothesis is:  The Earth is flat.     Now we design an experiment to prove or disprove the hypothesis,  the experiment needs to be carefully designed so as to avoid other factors which could distort the results.

How does this follow from what Pongo was responding to?

I think the earth is a sphere so why would I want to prove it's flat?

My post was a refutation of Pongo's claim that ...

Classic round-earth thought process. "I've been told that the earth is a sphere so why would I ever do anything whatsoever to verify what I've been told?"

My apologies if that wasn't clear to you.    You must not have understood the earlier posts.

[Pete Svarrior]

Right, so it sounds like you only went 1 post back and ignored the context that led up to it. I guess that explains your thought process. Try not to do that, though

[Rayzor]

Right, so it sounds like you only went 1 post back and ignored the context that led up to it. I guess that explains your thought process. Try not to do that, though

Umm,  no that's what you did.   You just jumped in the middle of a discussion and contributed nothing of substance.   Try reading properly next time.