*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 780
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Misconception: Earth's rotation cannot be detected
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2016, 04:00:55 AM »
Fact remains, there have been ZERO experiments PROVING the Earth is in motion...

Incorrect.  Ring Laser Gyroscopes are sensitive enough to detect the earth's rotation.  Here's an example in Germany that is so sensitive they have to compensate for movement of the underlying geology.  Stepping up to the largest RLG in the world, operating in Australia, they have enough sensitivity to detect not only the rotation, but even the wobble in that rotation caused by the moon.  (Currently out of service due to recent earthquakes)

Prefer to do your own experiments?  Good for you, highly encouraged, and there is good news: the effect that is exploited by those million-dollar instruments, known as the Sagnac Effect (named for a French physicist who first demonstrated it in 1913) is within reach of hobby-level equipment in the form of the fiber optic gyroscope!  Here's a guy who built such a device, a 1km fiber loop that is sensitive enough to detect the earth's rotation.
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

[topic] The South Celestial Pole
« Reply #21 on: September 02, 2016, 10:55:02 PM »
I. The Facts
II. Round Earth Explanation
III. Flat Earth Explanation

I. The Facts

1. Facing North, stars circle around a single point in the sky. This is called the North Celestial Pole.
2. Facing South, stars circle a different point in the sky. This is called the South Celestial Pole.
3. In the Northern Hemisphere, the North Celestial Pole is above the horizon, and the South Celestial Pole is an equal distance below* the horizon.
4. In the Southern Hemisphere, the South Celestial Pole is above the horizon, and the North Celestial Pole is an equal distance below* the horizon.
5. The North Celestial Pole is due north. The South Celestial Pole is due south. They are in exactly opposite directions from one another.



Here are both celestial poles in one image. North Celestial Pole is on the left above the horizon. South Celestial Pole is on the right, below the horizon. Forgive the distortion, it's a panoramic image:



* Obviously we can't actually see the celestial pole that is below the horizon. However, we can approximate it's position by extrapolating the paths of the stars.

II. Round Earth Explanation

The earth is a rotating sphere. From our perspective, the stars appear to be rotating around us. The elevation of each celestial pole depends on your location on the earth.

At 30 degrees north of the equator, the North Celestial Pole will be 30 degrees above the horizon and the South Celestial Pole will be 30 degrees below the horizon. Likewise, at 30 degrees south of the equator, the South Celestial Pole will be 30 degrees above the horizon and the North Celestial Pole will be 30 degrees below the horizon.



You can confirm for yourself that the elevation of each celestial pole corresponds exactly with your own latitude.

III. Flat Earth Explanation

Obviously, the visibility of the South Celestial Pole presents a problem for the flat earth model. If the stars are all rotating around a vertical axis, then the South Celestial Pole should be below the earth. In order to see it, one would have to peek over the edge. "Celestial Gears" are the most common solution to this problem that I have seen. I have never seen a particularly detailed explanation of how they work, but I assume it is something like this:



However, this still presents some problems.

1. There has never been a report of anyone seeing an intersection between the various South Celestial Poles. Considering that mankind has been navigating the oceans by the stars for several hundred years, this seems unlikely.
2. The South Celestial Pole is always exactly due South. It is always 180 degrees in the opposite direction of North. In the "Celestial Gears" model, moving east or west would cause the South Celestial Pole to no longer be due South. There would be a non 180 degree angle between the North Celestial Pole and South Celestial Pole.



The Bipolar Model has the exact same problem.

In conclusion, the visibility of the South Celestial Pole is in direct contradiction with the flat earth model. The earth isn't flat.

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 780
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Misconception: Horizon is always at eye level
« Reply #22 on: September 02, 2016, 11:43:16 PM »
An oft repeated "fact" is that no matter how high up you go, the horizon is always at eye level, which (so the story goes) would prove that the earth is flat.  Yesterday I took the photo below from an airplane at 36,000 feet altitude, using the free Dioptra theodolite app on a Nexus 6P phone.  Ignore the Lat/Long and Altitude data: the phone is in airplane mode and the last GPS fix it had was the Atlanta airport.  The pitch, roll, and compass sensors do not rely on GPS, so they work in airplane mode.  I leveled the phone as well as I could, within a degree of left-to-right roll and only 1/10 of a degree below level front-to-back.  As you can see, there is plenty of blue sky BELOW the dead-level position we are told to expect the horizon to be.  To the naked eye, the horizon LOOKS like it's at eye level, yes.  To an instrument, it measures at about 1 degree below eye level.  I don't have a photo with the theodolite's horizon matched up to the earth's horizon because the entire flight was over land (not likely to be level) and there were scattered clouds at every point that I took a look (obscuring the earth's horizon from view).
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

[comment] Misconception: Horizon is always at eye level
« Reply #23 on: September 10, 2016, 05:02:11 AM »
An oft repeated "fact" is that no matter how high up you go, the horizon is always at eye level, which (so the story goes) would prove that the earth is flat.  Yesterday I took the photo below from an airplane at 36,000 feet altitude, using the free Dioptra theodolite app on a Nexus 6P phone.  Ignore the Lat/Long and Altitude data: the phone is in airplane mode and the last GPS fix it had was the Atlanta airport.  The pitch, roll, and compass sensors do not rely on GPS, so they work in airplane mode.  I leveled the phone as well as I could, within a degree of left-to-right roll and only 1/10 of a degree below level front-to-back.  As you can see, there is plenty of blue sky BELOW the dead-level position we are told to expect the horizon to be.  To the naked eye, the horizon LOOKS like it's at eye level, yes.  To an instrument, it measures at about 1 degree below eye level.  I don't have a photo with the theodolite's horizon matched up to the earth's horizon because the entire flight was over land (not likely to be level) and there were scattered clouds at every point that I took a look (obscuring the earth's horizon from view).


Your photo doesn't seem to be showing up. Following the URL asks me for a google login. Perhaps it's a private photo?

Also, I'm not too inclined to trust a theodolite smart phone app, especially one that was possibly calibrated in a turbulent airplane. I'm going to hold off linking to this one until the evidence is more reliable.

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 780
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: [comment] Misconception: Horizon is always at eye level
« Reply #24 on: September 10, 2016, 05:22:08 AM »
Your photo doesn't seem to be showing up. Following the URL asks me for a google login. Perhaps it's a private photo?
Thanks, I'll check when I'm in front of my computer again.

Also, I'm not too inclined to trust a theodolite smart phone app, especially one that was possibly calibrated in a turbulent airplane. I'm going to hold off linking to this one until the evidence is more reliable.
Fair enough.  (Although of course I did my horizon zero in the airport terminal on a flat surface, not in flight)
Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

Re: Round Earth Information Repository
« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2017, 08:33:18 PM »
Someone asked me repost a discussion about flight times I had with Tom Bishop on here, but it is simpler to just link to the other post. The discussion starts at the bottom of page one of this thread: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=5888.0


[comment] Re: Round Earth Information Repository
« Reply #26 on: May 16, 2017, 11:52:21 PM »
Someone asked me repost a discussion about flight times I had with Tom Bishop on here, but it is simpler to just link to the other post. The discussion starts at the bottom of page one of this thread: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=5888.0

I added a link to this thread in the "Informative Forum Threads" section. Thanks for the contribution!

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: [topic] The South Celestial Pole
« Reply #27 on: September 25, 2017, 02:19:53 PM »


However, this still presents some problems.

1. There has never been a report of anyone seeing an intersection between the various South Celestial Poles. Considering that mankind has been navigating the oceans by the stars for several hundred years, this seems unlikely.
2. The South Celestial Pole is always exactly due South. It is always 180 degrees in the opposite direction of North. In the "Celestial Gears" model, moving east or west would cause the South Celestial Pole to no longer be due South. There would be a non 180 degree angle between the North Celestial Pole and South Celestial Pole.

Yeah - no kidding!

Wouldn't there also have to be three *exact* copies of the southern hemiplane stars - one for each "celestial gear"?   Precise positioning, color, brightness, spectrum, red-shift, exoplanet-induced-wobble...everything EXACTLY the same!    Seems kinda unlikely.

It's "convenient" that this model would kinda reproduce the pattern of the stars - except that when you're close to the center of the "gear" you'd see the stars rising in the south arching over the sky, then setting again in the south...which would be weird.

Also, there are plenty of small islands out between the major continents where the southern hemisphere stars are visible.  That would imply many more of these "gears" - one for every tiny rock.

If you were on the Falkland Islands (somewhere between the southern tips of S.America and S.Africa) - wouldn't you see stars heading from South-to-North on your Western horizon and from North to South on your eastern horizon?

Then what about ships sailing between these places?   Sailing ships used to judge "South" by the location of the Southern Cross constellation - but at the Falklands Islands, you'd see two of them!   One in the East and another in the West.

As always, FET works passably well in the Northern Hemisphere - but totally falls apart in the South.   This clearly follows the N.American/European origins of this theory from back in the days when S.Americans, Africans and Australians could conveniently be ignored.

Even by FE standards, this is batshit crazy!
Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?

*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 780
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
On December 14 1966, during the Space Race portion of the Cold War, an unmanned Soviet rocket failed to launch when one of the engines didn't light.  Automatic systems reacted, stopping the launch and achieving a safe shutdown of the running engines.  27 minutes later, while ground crews were preparing to replace the igniters on the failed engine, the capsule's emergency escape system activated, launching the capsule off the top of the rocket.  This unfortunately set fire to the rocket stack, which unsurprisingly resulted in an explosion, total loss of the rocket, and months of repair to the launch complex.

What does this have to do with the earth's rotation?  Well, the capsule has gyros which measure the orientation of the capsule, and one of the things that triggers the escape system is if the capsule's orientation deviates from the expected orientation at any point in the ascent portion of launch.  Since the system knew that the rocket was still on the pad, it expected it to remain vertical.  However, the gyros were detecting the rocket slowly pitching away from the vertical position recorded at T minus zero vertical due to the earth rotating the rocket eastward.  Once it got close to 7° from "vertical" the system became vulnerable to small vibrations pushing it past the trigger point, which seems to have happened when crews returned the service gantries to the service position.  The escape system was not shut down when the launch aborted, and that is by design: in a manned mission launch abort, you still want that system live in case the rocket starts to actually fall over.


Proud member of İntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Round Earth Information Repository
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2019, 01:13:04 PM »
Back in the days of FEIR, this thread may have made some sense (and even then you should have just set up a blog). Since that board no longer exists, and this thread absolutely doesn't fit in FEM, I'm closing it.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume