UA and the atmosplane
« on: May 02, 2021, 08:48:11 PM »

I tried to find the answer to this in the wiki, but I guess I didn't word my search well enough. Here's my question:

Does the accelerating earth push against the atmosplane (air), or is the air also being accelerated?

If the former is the case, then the air would be pushed towards the edges of the earth, and that clearly is not happening. How does it all work? If there is a wiki page for this, then please just point me to it and I'll try to figure it out on my own. Thanks.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 1507
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2021, 02:37:49 AM »
Well, there are some interesting answers: see https://wiki.tfes.org/Atmolayer
You can lead a flat earther to the curve but you can't make him think!

Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2021, 06:43:48 AM »
That is a strange page. FE emphasise taking an empirical approach and basing ideas on observations and then put stuff like this in the Wiki:

Quote
The Dark Energy Field is a vector field. It has a gradient that is smallest at the interaction of the atmosphere and the field, called the boundary layer. The DEF interacts with the magnetic field of the earth at this boundary layer. These vectors produce a force vector that is orthogonal to the other vectors in four dimensional space. This force vector is always normal to the boundary layer, thus providing a type of forced containment for the atmosphere.

That’s a whole lot of word salad! What is any of that based on other than just wild speculation?!

It’s interesting that “the dome” isn’t mentioned. That’s a hypothesis favoured by some on here.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Offline fisherman

  • *
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2021, 01:40:41 PM »
There has to be some force working on the atmosphere, otherwise atmospheric pressure wouldn't be possible.
There are two kinds of people in the world.  Those that can infer logical conclusions from given information

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 392
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2021, 01:45:58 PM »
There has to be some force working on the atmosphere, otherwise atmospheric pressure wouldn't be possible.

Agreed. The whole thing is nuts, but if completely falls apart unless you assume that the earth is being pushed up from below, as it were.

Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2021, 02:24:56 PM »
There has to be some force working on the atmosphere, otherwise atmospheric pressure wouldn't be possible.

Agreed. The whole thing is nuts, but if completely falls apart unless you assume that the earth is being pushed up from below, as it were.
If the earth is being pushed up then that would create the force needed to make the air pressure gradient we observe. No idea what would create enough force to keep the entire earth accelerating upwards forever, but let’s assume that is what is going on. But even then there would be nothing to stop the atmoplane from simply leaking off the side. An ice wall isn’t going to cut it, that might provide some containment up to its own height but we have atmospheric readings for miles upwards. A physical dome would work but that’s not mentioned on the Wiki and there is no material we know of which a dome that big could be made of without falling apart under its own weight. An infinite earth would require an infinite force to accelerate it upwards. So we are just left with the meaningless word salad I quoted above which barely qualifies as a hypothesis let alone a theory.
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 392
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2021, 02:40:48 PM »
There has to be some force working on the atmosphere, otherwise atmospheric pressure wouldn't be possible.

Agreed. The whole thing is nuts, but if completely falls apart unless you assume that the earth is being pushed up from below, as it were.
If the earth is being pushed up then that would create the force needed to make the air pressure gradient we observe. No idea what would create enough force to keep the entire earth accelerating upwards forever, but let’s assume that is what is going on. But even then there would be nothing to stop the atmoplane from simply leaking off the side. An ice wall isn’t going to cut it, that might provide some containment up to its own height but we have atmospheric readings for miles upwards. A physical dome would work but that’s not mentioned on the Wiki and there is no material we know of which a dome that big could be made of without falling apart under its own weight. An infinite earth would require an infinite force to accelerate it upwards. So we are just left with the meaningless word salad I quoted above which barely qualifies as a hypothesis let alone a theory.

It’s even worse than that. Force is one thing, but a force aligned with the direction of travel = work done, which therefore requires a massive, ever increasing energy source. And no heat transfer. Magical.

Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2021, 03:11:31 PM »
There has to be some force working on the atmosphere, otherwise atmospheric pressure wouldn't be possible.

Agreed. The whole thing is nuts, but if completely falls apart unless you assume that the earth is being pushed up from below, as it were.
If the earth is being pushed up then that would create the force needed to make the air pressure gradient we observe. No idea what would create enough force to keep the entire earth accelerating upwards forever, but let’s assume that is what is going on. But even then there would be nothing to stop the atmoplane from simply leaking off the side. An ice wall isn’t going to cut it, that might provide some containment up to its own height but we have atmospheric readings for miles upwards. A physical dome would work but that’s not mentioned on the Wiki and there is no material we know of which a dome that big could be made of without falling apart under its own weight. An infinite earth would require an infinite force to accelerate it upwards. So we are just left with the meaningless word salad I quoted above which barely qualifies as a hypothesis let alone a theory.


Agreed on the pressure gradient thing but by the same token, if the Earth  is constantly accelerating, it wouldn't need to be all enveloping; just (!!) a wall roughly as high as the Karman Line, like a big baking tray. 

Here commenceth the Flat/Round/Cake-Tin debate.


Offline fisherman

  • *
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2021, 04:44:58 PM »
Quote
Agreed on the pressure gradient thing but by the same token, if the Earth  is constantly accelerating, it wouldn't need to be all enveloping; just (!!) a wall roughly as high as the Karman Line, like a big baking tray.

If there were something containing the atmosphere above us, we'd see a pressure gradient in reverse of what we see.  Air pressure would increase with altitude as the atmosphere becomes compressed against whatever is containing it.

In real life, air pressure is highr at lower altitudes because as gravity works on the atmosphere, the weight of all the air above compresses the air below against the surface of the earth.  UA would have to work in reverse and compress the air against whatever is containing it.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2021, 04:46:53 PM by fisherman »
There are two kinds of people in the world.  Those that can infer logical conclusions from given information

Offline c0i9z

  • *
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2021, 05:20:09 PM »
Unless the thing was accelerated at the same time, so it would create a relative vacuum and 'pull up' the atmosphere at the same rate as the bottom part 'pushes' it up. Though, of course, that would force the atmosphere to be the same pressure throughout the volume.

Offline fisherman

  • *
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
Re: UA and the atmosplane
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2021, 06:08:16 PM »
Unless the thing was accelerated at the same time, so it would create a relative vacuum and 'pull up' the atmosphere at the same rate as the bottom part 'pushes' it up. Though, of course, that would force the atmosphere to be the same pressure throughout the volume.

Agreed.  Every solution causes another problem and every answer raises another question with FE.
There are two kinds of people in the world.  Those that can infer logical conclusions from given information