The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: timterroo on August 03, 2018, 01:43:02 AM
-
Look at this picture. It depicts the circular path that the sun takes at different seasons of the year.
In North America, the days are considerably longer in the summer than they are in the winter. We're talking roughly 8 hours difference from the longest to the shortest day.
In this picture, the inner circle represents the path the sun takes during the summer. If the sun moves at the same speed all year, wouldn't the summer days be much shorter than the winter days since the circumference of the summer path is much smaller than the winter path?
Edit: I guess the question is, does the speed of the sun change as the seasons change? I'm not understanding how the length of days (a 24 hour period) remains constant in this model.
-
I searched for the answer to this question prior to this post, but did not find it. I did just find another post with this question and answer. My apologies. You can close this thread....
-
It is my understanding that the FE answer to this is “We don’t know.” That is the stock answer to anything that cannot have a mathematical or physical model. If pushed on this they usually say something like “We have more important things to do than that!”
The FE hypothesis is built on bold statements of non-fact backed up with ... and alarming lack of rigor.
-
It is my understanding that the FE answer to this is “We don’t know.” That is the stock answer to anything that cannot have a mathematical or physical model. If pushed on this they usually say something like “We have more important things to do than that!”
The FE hypothesis is built on bold statements of non-fact backed up with ... and alarming lack of rigor.
Your last couple posts are treading back to being angsty complaints about FE. If you have nothing to add, don't both posting in the upper fora. If you want to complain, well I think you have figured out where to do that by now. Next one will be a few days to review the rules since you are already on 3 warnings.
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Are you suggesting that the Earth rotates beneath the sun, rather that the sun spinning above the Earth? As that's the only way to make your analogy applicable.
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Are you suggesting that the Earth rotates beneath the sun, rather that the sun spinning above the Earth? As that's the only way to make your analogy applicable.
I think Tom is claiming the sun has a constant angular velocity rather than a constant linear velocity.
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Needles died out with acoustic gramophones.
The stylus on a modern record player does experience a speed change in terms of linear velocity as it moves across the record.
The rotational speed is constant, at 33.33 RPM, but the distance travelled in each revolution varies.
So, in the diagram referenced, what do you think is going on? It shows the Sun in two circles, one smaller than the other. Do you think the rotational speed is constant? Once per year? If so, the linear speed must change.
Or do you think the linear speed stays the same? In which case, the rotational speed must alter.
Or do you think the Earth is rotating under the sun, as others have asked? If so, at a constant linear speed, or rotational?
-
The earth either spins beneath the sun and moon. Or we are stationary and they as well as the universe rotate around us. Now the hard answer is we really do not know. I feel personally the proper model would be a modified yin/yang. The Sun and moon spinning around us at different speeds, hence eclipses and things. A lot of this whole thing is theory, for those who ask why we don't have answers. However, the globe ,is also just a theory. I have no idea if it is a globe or a plane. That is what makes these conversations important, and why we need to have them in a calm understanding way.
I believe it is flat because that is what I can prove with all of my senses, without outside influence. You believe it is round because you were told it was.
There is no other way to put it.
-
I believe it is flat because that is what I can prove with all of my senses, without outside influence. You believe it is round because you were told it was.
My senses tell me it is a globe. Two people can see the same thing two different ways. This is called perception. Much of what we are debating is perspective and whether or not we can believe a picture, a statement, a mathematical equation, or a theory. Perspective does not make you correct. If you are moving at nearly the speed of light, even a globe would appear flat - this is how photons perceive things (if they had a brain). Does that make it less of a globe?
Stating that "the globe is also just a theory" implies that everyone who has ever been part of a space mission, NASA, or any of these private companies that are launching things into space are ALL telling us lies, and they are all collaborating to keep the lie consistent. Otherwise, if they are truths, they are absolute proof the earth is round.
To deny FET, you do not have to call anyone a liar because there are no supposed pictures of flat earth from space. There are no mathematical proofs to deny, no first-hand experiences to listen to, nothing but people discussing an idea. The only support for this idea is based on others being liars. FET is dependent on everyone else being a liar.
It is a theory born out of disbelief, scorn, spite, and conspiracy. Not proof. There is no evidence the earth is flat. Looking out at the ground and saying, "It just looks flat!" is the furthest thing from evidence. Explaining away space flight, and zero-G as conspiracy is not proof the earth is flat. Saying there is no such thing as gravity is not proof the earth is flat. Saying that the horizon did or did not appear or disappear at a particular vantage point is not proof the earth is flat. If all of this were proof that the earth is flat, then a blind man is proof the earth does not exist AT ALL - he sees nothing, therefore there is nothing.....
-
If we are going to rely on our senses to tell us what is true or false, we are in some serious trouble.... This from a cognitive psychologist.
-
However, the globe ,is also just a theory.
No, it isn’t.
The globe earth has been observed and photographed.
Your senses are limited, using that as a basis for believing in a flat earth is erroneous.
-
I think Tom is claiming the sun has a constant angular velocity rather than a constant linear velocity.
Would tom care to provide a mechanism/model wherein this explained? What forces are in play? What math is in play?
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Ballerinas.
-
If all of this were proof that the earth is flat, then a blind man is proof the earth does not exist AT ALL - he sees nothing, therefore there is nothing.....
Oh man, I'm going to steal that, sorry. Mind if I use it as a signature?
-
If all of this were proof that the earth is flat, then a blind man is proof the earth does not exist AT ALL - he sees nothing, therefore there is nothing.....
Oh man, I'm going to steal that, sorry. Mind if I use it as a signature?
Not at all.
-
I believe it is flat because that is what I can prove with all of my senses, without outside influence. You believe it is round because you were told it was.
I am not sure this is a useful approach. Do you honestly think it is?
Let me try to explain what I mean.
First, I don't think it has been proven yet that the earth is actually flat. Sure, you may assert that you simply can't see a curvature, but that in and of itself is not proof of it not being a sphere.
Second, science uses cause and effect to 'observe' things indirectly all the time, sometimes very, very indirectly. For instance, no one has observed with their senses the control of electron flow in a transistor or integrated circuit, yet, through several degrees of indirect measurement it was theorized that that is indeed what would happen and through those theories such things like the internet, your computer, TV, cell phones, alarm systems, etc, etc... have been designed and built.
Thirdly, there is imagination. Humans are endowed with very active and useful imaginations. We are not just slugs or ants that solely react to input from their senses. We can and do use our imaginations to do a great many things we cannot perceive with our 5 senses. One of the most useful things it to predict things that have not yet even happened or make assumptions about unseen events. For instance, you may plan a trip around rush hour and you assume traffic will be bad on certain more direct routes due to volume and the likelihood of fender benders, so you plan to use a route that otherwise would be less desirable, but in light of your imagined/predicted/assumed problems on the more direct routes you feel it would be better. In doing so you have made decisions based on something that has not yet even happened, let alone directly observed.
Also, there are things that happen around us all the time that we don't observe but they still affect our lives. Government bodies meet and decide on legislation that becomes law which affects our rights a freedoms. We don't see that happening, but it does. A guy in a foreign country decides to shut down his business and all of a sudden we have a shortage of some doodad or food stuff. A tree falls in the forest and diverts a stream that was used by salmon for spawning and now the salmon fishing is lousy.
Finally, we all rely on things we are 'told' to live our lives. Every day. In modern societies we cannot live entirely by what we can garner from our own senses in real time as we go about our day to day lives. There is just too much to take into account and most of that we can't observe directly. So we follow signs, read or listen to the news and other sources of information, and talk with our network of friends and associates to help us make the decisions we need to make.
So I honestly don't think yours is a truly useful philosophy, and I think it is likely that you don't fully live by it.
-
I believe it is flat because that is what I can prove with all of my senses, without outside influence. You believe it is round because you were told it was.
Your method for determining truth is fraught with problems (https://www.google.com/search?q=optical+illusions&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS796US796&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiO0dKkgu3cAhUj6IMKHcV3CD0Q_AUICigB&biw=1682&bih=916).
-
I believe it is flat because that is what I can prove with all of my senses, without outside influence.
Most of my senses tell me that there's nothing in my microwave oven when it's switched on, but if I were to put my hand or head in there whilst it's running, that would be a bad move.
Most of my senses would tell me that there's a glass of clean water in front of me. I would only find out about any toxins and poisons within it once I'd ingested it.
Your senses can let you down in so many ways, that you have no choice, in everyday life, but to rely on what others tell you for a good proportion of what you do, see, hear, etc.
Besides which, there's not enough time in the day to verify absolutely everything for yourself.
-
So, back to the OP.....
If the sun (and moon) is rotating around the earth, there should be a central location they are rotating around. At least according to the laws of centripetal motion theorized by Isaac Newton.
Can someone help me understand how this works if the sun has a shorter circular path during the summer and a longer circular path in the winter. If the linear speed slows down in the summer (closer to the center) and speeds up in the winter (further from the center), and the angular speed remains constant, how does this theory align with Newton's law centripetal force?
Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about:
We have all sat in a chair and had someone spin us around and around and around. Then, you probably extended your legs outward and noticed that your speed of rotation slowed down. Then you tucked your legs inward and noticed that the speed of rotation increased without any additional force being applied.
So, as the sun rotates around the earth, and it actually slows down when it is closer to the center, there must be another force being applied somehow that would cause it to defy Newton's Law. Otherwise, as the sun gets closer to the center of rotation, its angular speed should also increase rather than remain constant.
What is this other force that causes the sun (and moon) to defy Newton's Law?
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Are you suggesting that the Earth rotates beneath the sun, rather that the sun spinning above the Earth? As that's the only way to make your analogy applicable.
I think Tom is claiming the sun has a constant angular velocity rather than a constant linear velocity.
Actually, as a record (or CD/DVD) spins in the drive and the needle (or eye) moves closer or further from the center, the angular velocity of the record (or CD/DVD) increases as it moves closer and decreases as it moves further. This is contrary to how the sun should move in FET. It should slow down towards the center and speed up towards the exterior. However, the analogy does not work because CD/DVD are intentionally sped up when the eye is in the center and the RPM is slowed down at the outer of the disk in order to create continuity as the data bits are read - constant linear velocity.
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Also, Tom, to directly answer your question, yes, the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that. And it does change speeds. But again, I don't think that analogy quite fits since the record needs constant linear velocity, the sun needs constant angular velocity.
-
Ok, after some thought I think I understand what Tom was saying.
Let's suppose for a minute that the earth rotates under the sun. It spins like a record but it doesn't have to change speeds as the sun moves from the inside to the outside as seasons change. If the speed of the spinning earth remains constant, the circular path of the sun will always take 24 hours regardless of the Suns distance from the center of rotation.
Now keep the same mechancs, but instead of the earth rotating, the sun does the rotating. That should work out. Aside the fact that it still seems to defy newtons law.
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Tom, is the FE sun subject to rotational forces such as centripetal and/or centrifugal force?
-
Actually, as a record (or CD/DVD) spins in the drive and the needle (or eye) moves closer or further from the center, the angular velocity of the record (or CD/DVD) increases as it moves closer and decreases as it moves further.
Just to be pedantic, record players are CAV, while audio CDs, video DVDs, and video Blu-rays are CLV. Data optical discs can be either CAV or CLV.
So the needle of a record player will cover more ground at the start of each side (outside) than it will at the end (inside). The result was greater fidelity at the beginning of each side, because the needle was covering more linear space each second, and could pack more detail into each second.
This was well known to mastering engineers (and bands), and they would often take this into consideration when deciding what order to put the tracks on a record. Audio CDs eliminated this concern with CLV. Each "pit" took up the exact same linear distance, and each second had the exact same number of "pits". If you have an audio CD player with a window showing the disk as it spins, you can see the speed change when you skip tracks. This is especially visible when skipping from the last track to the first on a long CD.
Here is a neat image to help keep them straight (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Comparison_disk_storage.svg).
On an AE FE map, the sun would have to be CAV for a day to be a consistent 24 hours.
-
What is this other force that causes the sun (and moon) to defy Newton's Law?
In addition to the rotational speed changes, what is the force that causes the sun and moon to move in and out (to different "tracks")?
I think these questions fall into the FE category of "we don't yet know". Often when we RE'ers ask these questions, we don't get answers.
-
Actually, as a record (or CD/DVD) spins in the drive and the needle (or eye) moves closer or further from the center, the angular velocity of the record (or CD/DVD) increases as it moves closer and decreases as it moves further.
Just to be pedantic, record players are CAV, while audio CDs, video DVDs, and video Blu-rays are CLV. Data optical discs can be either CAV or CLV.
So the needle of a record player will cover more ground at the start of each side (outside) than it will at the end (inside). The result was greater fidelity at the beginning of each side, because the needle was covering more linear space each second, and could pack more detail into each second.
This was well known to mastering engineers (and bands), and they would often take this into consideration when deciding what order to put the tracks on a record. Audio CDs eliminated this concern with CLV. Each "pit" took up the exact same linear distance, and each second had the exact same number of "pits". If you have an audio CD player with a window showing the disk as it spins, you can see the speed change when you skip tracks. This is especially visible when skipping from the last track to the first on a long CD.
Here is a neat image to help keep them straight (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Comparison_disk_storage.svg).
On an AE FE map, the sun would have to be CAV for a day to be a consistent 24 hours.
Interesting... I will admit, records are just before my time. I just assumed they worked the same as CD/DVDs. I think my point is still relevant, though.
-
The speed of a needle on a record on a record player also changes when it is closer or further from the center. Would you say that the record needs to "change speeds" to achieve that?
Tom, is the FE sun subject to rotational forces such as centripetal and/or centrifugal force?
This is a perilous question. One is an actual force and one is an apparent force (i.e., not real, but a consequence of a rotating reference frame). There is a tremendous problem with FET in regards to the centripetal acceleration and centrifugal force. Neither is satisfactorily explained in FET, and we await a coherent theory.
If you compare a needle on a record to a person on a flat earth, you will quickly see that different physics are needed to describe each...which should not be the case.
Let me know how else I can assist.