61

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: February 16, 2022, 08:20:45 PM »

...
Who the hell told Action his ban was up?

Also:
https://www.npr.org/2022/02/15/1080407022/trump-vs-mcconnell-latest-round-between-gop-heavyweights-has-the-highest-stakes-

Long story short: McConnel has something of a backbone, but only because the RNC loves Trump and he does not.

Look, it was getting a bit exhausting having to manage over at the other place, I may have given him a hint...

That aside though, did anyone see Your Favorite President dropped his first Truth bomb? And his oldest child quickly and diligently screenshotted it to post on Twitter? Pretty sweet flex, right?

62

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Found a fully working flat earth model?

« on: February 16, 2022, 07:04:36 PM »

Have you tried reading the very first page? The distances are going to be the same as on a globe. Because beginning at the surface of the Earth and extending outwards, it's the same model. This is a globe still, expressed with a coordinate transformation. It still preserves the same distances and angles we experience every day. Because beginning at the surface of the Earth and extending outwards, it's the same model.

I suspect there's a pesky singularity if you go below the surface far enough, though

63

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Found a fully working flat earth model?

« on: February 07, 2022, 02:17:56 PM »

If OP is claiming that via arbitrary transformation the globe can be a disc and vice versa, what’s to say then the Earth isn’t a rhombus, donut, non-euclidean, or shaped exactly like Howard Stern?

If you had read basically anything OP posted in this thread you are posting in right now, you'd know they said exactly this already.

64

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Allow Markjo Lounge access

« on: February 05, 2022, 08:02:20 PM »

I am in favor of this proposal

65

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Found a fully working flat earth model?

« on: February 05, 2022, 05:45:40 PM »

There is no way to differentiate the models.

Why? Because you say so? Gotta have something better than that....

Because one is simply a mapping of the other into a different coordinate system. They are the same.

66

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Found a fully working flat earth model?

« on: February 05, 2022, 03:43:28 AM »

I think the problem is twofold, jimster. First, you can't spell Sigma Octantis at all and apparently refuse to even check. Second, and probably more importantly,  you haven't bothered actually reading anything troolon has written about the model, because had you done that, you'd at least recognize the fact that objects map identically in the standard RE framework as they do in troolon's FE model. You've completely ignored the distance metric that is widely different than the ruler you are used to as well as the coordinate transformation. The knee-jerk reaction people seem to have to anyone that even gives a hint that they might be non combative toward FE is astounding to behold.

Troolon, I admire your patience. This is a neat construction you've presented here, and clearly done a lot of work to flesh out and demonstrate.

67

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: African-Americans and Americans are two different groups

« on: January 21, 2022, 03:47:57 AM »

It's of course fun to have a laugh at Mitch McConnell's expense, I enjoy that as much as anyone else. But this one has me rolling my eyes. "Old man has tough time with words" is pretty boring. And that's not to say you (and all the talking heads posting about it) are wrong, it's just that there's no way anyone is going to see this through anything other than their already-established political goggles.

So what else is new?

Nothing at all, including this silly sound bite from McConnell. Lefties will say he said the quiet part out loud. Righties will say he just made a gaffe. No one can definitively say either way. The dial doesn't move. This silliness fans the flames of division among the masses and serves literally no other purpose.

please don't trot out the tired cliche that it was the Democrats who fought for slavery and the Republicans who fought against it 160 years ago, it's just not constructive

Alright friend, I see I'm a proxy here for someone that wronged you, but try not to take out your frustrations with others on me.

This is beyond "old man has a tough time with words". He said what he meant, he just didn't mean to say what he meant.

You might be right about that. But he's got plausible deniability on his side, and plausible deniability is an enshrined democratic institution at this point. No one that thinks he's racist needed this statement to confirm it. And no one that thinks otherwise will hear this and think it was anything other than a gaffe.

68

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: African-Americans and Americans are two different groups

« on: January 21, 2022, 02:15:04 AM »

It's of course fun to have a laugh at Mitch McConnell's expense, I enjoy that as much as anyone else. But this one has me rolling my eyes. "Old man has tough time with words" is pretty boring. And that's not to say you (and all the talking heads posting about it) are wrong, it's just that there's no way anyone is going to see this through anything other than their already-established political goggles. And Biden makes constant gaffes, so there's the whole glass houses and rocks thing too.

69

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 07, 2022, 06:58:01 PM »

There have been murmurs that Carlson, too, might run in 2024.

oh my god yes please

My country's constant political misfortune is pretty entertaining to you, huh? 

It's a brief distraction from the complete shitshow over here.
The UK and US do seem to have been competing for the highly coveted "stupidest electorate" prize. We did Brexit, you elected Trump, we've elected Boris in a landslide.
I think you might still be edging it, but it's close.

WE'RE NUMBER ONE! /s

70

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Elizabeth Holmes - Guilty

« on: January 04, 2022, 01:39:22 AM »

If only they got her on more of the counts. Sounds like they might declare a mistrial on 3 of them.

71

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: January 03, 2022, 01:50:35 AM »

Rog this is an amazingly wonderful fail so please take a second to breathe and read. Velocity quite literally only has a definition as one body WITH RESPECT TO another body. If there is a person standing at a suspended elevation above a disc, or a giant ball, or on the top of a balcony on a space ship, or anywhere at all really where there is any sort of perceived downwards force acting on them in a gravity-like fashion, the velocity of both the Earth and the person in their own FoR is 0m/s. Neither body is moving at any percentage of c. In fact, they measure their instantaneous velocity to be exactly 0% of c, because light still moves away from them at exactly c. It doesn't matter how much time has passed. It doesn't matter how old the universe is. The velocity they measure between themselves (the observer on Earth and the one suspended above, about to jump) as 0/ms, while light continues to move away at c.

It seems weird. It's a wild thing to wrap your brain around. I mean, no matter how fast a car is driving, another car can always drive a little bit faster and notice that they are catching up with the driver in front of them. But no matter how fast any of those cars drive, every single driver always measures light moving exactly c away from them. None of them make any headway in trying to get closer to driving anywhere near as close as the light can move away from them, even in a hypothetical car that can accelerate at 10m/s/s forever. That weird car, even with its crazy infinite acceleration ability, would have a driver that would STILL always measure light moving away from them at exactly c.

72

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: January 03, 2022, 12:38:36 AM »

An observer standing on the surface of the Earth is moving at 0.99c with respect to the surface of the Earth while still just simply standing on the surface of the Earth? That's an amazing thing to say. I have to be missing something here.

73

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Weather forecasts

« on: December 31, 2021, 10:15:40 PM »

Places like The Weather Channel have been their own worst enemy in terms of public perception of how well they perform their duty of reporting the weather. A few years back, their app rolled out a feature that would send you a notification on your phone letting you know rain would begin in, for example, 10 minutes. The problem with that is, when they send that alert and it's either already started raining OR 10 minutes pass and the rain has not yet begun, it's an immediate reminder that they, yet again, got something wrong. A thing that I didn't even ask them to communicate. A truly self-inflicted wound.

74

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 31, 2021, 02:43:53 PM »

The jumper is moving at a relativistic velocity with respect to the Earth?? How do you figure?

75

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 31, 2021, 01:39:53 AM »

I'm confused why anyone is still listening to Hillary in end stage 2021, frankly. Especially Tom, but I'm not limiting this to any single person. Can we just move on from listening to the things she says as if her opinion matters?

76

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 20, 2021, 03:57:39 AM »

You're getting so close! This is exciting!

If only it were possible to define a FoR where, immediately prior to jumping, the disc and the jumper were both at 0m/a. It's a tricky problem, eh?

77

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 19, 2021, 12:41:05 AM »

I'm pretty sure at this point that Rog thinks there's some preferred FoR where clocks have some default rate of ticking. That's the only way I can imagine this terrible argument not coming from a place of trolling.

78

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 18, 2021, 02:19:06 PM »

This jumper isn't subject to momentum magically somehow? Let's think about this for a second. Let's pretend he's standing on a platform that's, oh, say 30 meters (-ish) above this disc that's accelerating ever upwards at 10m/s/s (-ish, again, for funsies, ok?). The disc has been accelerating for <who the fuck really cares it doesn't matter but let's have fun> 1 hour. The jumper does a trust fall from the platform he was standing on. Once he's in a "free fall" state, after 1 second has transpired, and ignoring air resistance, how fast do you figure that jumper sees the ground approaching him? In other words, what's the relative velocity between the disc and the jumper? Hint: It's not 200000ms

Clyde, refer to my response to Pete and see if that clarifies things for you.

I checked, and in not part of your response to Pete did you answer the questions I asked.

79

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 18, 2021, 02:18:16 AM »

I'm not sure you know how to set up initial parameters at all based on this. The initial velocity between the jumper and the Earth should be 0 m/s, shouldn't it? After all, isn't the jumper at a fixed distance above the Earth, relative to the Earth, when they jump?

While the jumper is on the chair, he would be accelerated at the same rate with the same velocity as the earth and the relative velocity would be zero.

But once he jumps, he is no longer being accelerated.  There is no force on him, no acceleration, no velocity. He's just hanging there inert. But the earth is still accelerating while he is hanging there, so the relative velocity between the jumper and the earth would be whatever the velocity the earth is moving relative to the jumper.

This jumper isn't subject to momentum magically somehow? Let's think about this for a second. Let's pretend he's standing on a platform that's, oh, say 30 meters (-ish) above this disc that's accelerating ever upwards at 10m/s/s (-ish, again, for funsies, ok?). The disc has been accelerating for <who the fuck really cares it doesn't matter but let's have fun> 1 hour. The jumper does a trust fall from the platform he was standing on. Once he's in a "free fall" state, after 1 second has transpired, and ignoring air resistance, how fast do you figure that jumper sees the ground approaching him? In other words, what's the relative velocity between the disc and the jumper? Hint: It's not 200000ms.

Edit: Let's ignore the minuscule relativistic effects too, for the sake of ease. Unless you want to try and make the case that it matters somehow in this specific example, in which case I am waited with eager anticipation.

80

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 17, 2021, 09:17:04 PM »

Obviously, I didn’t set up the paramters clearly enough.   T0 is the earth (or an observer on earth). “T” is the jumper.

If the relative velocity between them is 200000km/s (IOW, if the earth (and the observer) is accelerating up at 200000ms and the jumper is inertial with no velocity) and T₀  records an elapsed time of 1s from the time T leaves the surface of the chair and meets the ground, T will record an elapsed time of 1.34s.

I'm not sure you know how to set up initial parameters at all based on this. The initial velocity between the jumper and the Earth should be 0 m/s, shouldn't it? After all, isn't the jumper at a fixed distance above the Earth, relative to the Earth, when they jump?