The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: seaworthiness5923 on May 03, 2021, 10:12:32 AM
-
Really sorry, I originally posted this in the wrong place
I’ve been doing a lot of independent thinking recently, and lots of it has led me to this forum; I am becoming more and more sceptical about the nature of the planet. However, one thing this journey has definitely taught me is to question what others might say and try to work out an answer for myself.
To my question:
It is my understanding that mainstream science believes the sun to be 93 million miles a way, and producing vast amounts of energy through nuclear fusion at its core, which occurs due to the extreme temperature and pressure, then releases energy from its surface as electromagnetic radiation (light and heat), which provides energy to the planet.
In my research of the flat earth model, the sun is believed to be a much smaller and closer light source, acting as a sort of spotlight on around half of the plane at once. My question(s) is, if the sun is much smaller than believed by modern science, then how can it produce enough energy for the earth, and is there another energy source that I’ve missed?
Feel free to let me know if I’ve missed something obvious (I didn't see anything answering my question in the FAQ, but if there is please let me know), or have explained something incorrectly, I’m fairly new here so any help is appreciated.
-
if the sun is much smaller than believed by modern science, then how can it produce enough energy for the earth, and is there another energy source that I’ve missed?
The simplest answer is that it is unknown. Once the fusion mythology, which is no more sound (indeed, profoundly stupid) than the "theory" of the giant ignited street lamp in the sky that preceded it, is done away with - there is no obvious potential explanation for the source of the power. In any case, the output of the sun doesn't vary just because our mythology does.
The very concept that the sun is the source of all power is most likely flawed, and a manifestation of basic primative sun/helios worship.
-
if the sun is much smaller than believed by modern science, then how can it produce enough energy for the earth, and is there another energy source that I’ve missed?
The simplest answer is that it is unknown. Once the fusion mythology, which is no more sound (indeed, profoundly stupid) than the "theory" of the giant ignited street lamp in the sky that preceded it, is done away with - there is no obvious potential explanation for the source of the power. In any case, the output of the sun doesn't vary just because our mythology does.
The very concept that the sun is the source of all power is most likely flawed, and a manifestation of basic primative sun/helios worship.
I would say that it is because of the sun being the source of all power that the basic primitive sun/Helios worship was manifested rather than the other way round.
-
Have you never experienced a day with patchy cloud and observed the difference in temperature when the sun comes out?
Even in the FE model the seasons are explained by the sun’s changing orbit. It’s clear that pretty much all our energy comes from the sun.
-
if the sun is much smaller than believed by modern science, then how can it produce enough energy for the earth, and is there another energy source that I’ve missed?
The simplest answer is that it is unknown. Once the fusion mythology, which is no more sound (indeed, profoundly stupid) than the "theory" of the giant ignited street lamp in the sky that preceded it, is done away with - there is no obvious potential explanation for the source of the power. In any case, the output of the sun doesn't vary just because our mythology does.
The very concept that the sun is the source of all power is most likely flawed, and a manifestation of basic primative sun/helios worship.
What part of "sunburn" has you confused?
-
if the sun is much smaller than believed by modern science, then how can it produce enough energy for the earth, and is there another energy source that I’ve missed?
The simplest answer is that it is unknown. Once the fusion mythology, which is no more sound (indeed, profoundly stupid) than the "theory" of the giant ignited street lamp in the sky that preceded it, is done away with - there is no obvious potential explanation for the source of the power. In any case, the output of the sun doesn't vary just because our mythology does.
The very concept that the sun is the source of all power is most likely flawed, and a manifestation of basic primative sun/helios worship.
Why do you believe that fusion is mythological? We've already harnessed the power of fusion - it's the acting force behind thermonuclear bombs. I think it's crazy if you don't believe in nuclear weapons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3ezhvCzWCM
-
The Earth's energy comes from heat deep underground the surface. The deepest we have drilled on record is about 7 miles at the Kola superdeep borehole. Boy that lava must be really deep. No one knows how deep because we can't stick a tape measure down there.
-
The Earth's energy comes from heat deep underground the surface. The deepest we have drilled on record is about 7 miles at the Kola superdeep borehole. Boy that lava must be really deep. No one knows how deep because we can't stick a tape measure down there.
If this was the major source of energy in the surface, then temperatures would not drop at night or when the sun is blocked from clouds.
-
If this was the major source of energy in the surface, then temperatures would not drop at night or when the sun is blocked from clouds.
This doesn't even begin to make sense - if you have 2 sources of heat (in the colloquial meaning of the word) and you remove one, the temperature is going to drop. The existence of multiple sources of something does not change the fundamentals of subtraction.
-
If this was the major source of energy in the surface, then temperatures would not drop at night or when the sun is blocked from clouds.
This doesn't even begin to make sense - if you have 2 sources of heat (in the colloquial meaning of the word) and you remove one, the temperature is going to drop. The existence of multiple sources of something does not change the fundamentals of subtraction.
He clearly said “major source” in response to a post which implied that the earth’s energy comes entirely from geothermic sources.
-
He clearly said “major source”
I don't see how this changes the simple contradiction in his argument.
-
He clearly said “major source”
I don't see how this changes the simple contradiction in his argument.
Fair enough. I should have said something like "... would not drop significantly at night...". And by significantly I mean to the extend that temperature drops under these circumstances.
Note that the comment that I answer to implies that all energy comes from heat deep underground the surface. This cannot be true and this is what I am trying to counterargue against.
-
Note that the comment that I answer to implies that all energy comes from heat deep underground the surface. This cannot be true and this is what I am trying to counterargue against.
Yes, you took a Round Earther's edgy/ironic post, altered its meaning by inferring an "implication" you admit was nonsensical, and wasted everyone's time with meaningless RE infighting. Perhaps we can get back to discussing FET now, preferably without trying to deny the concepts of day and night?
-
Well I also do not see how this thread is relevant to the FE debate. Both FE and RE agree that the sun is a major energy source as otherwise I do not see what would explain the lower temperatures in the poles compared to the rest of the Earth.
-
I've been thinking about this issue lately... Another source of energy for the earth may be the Earth itself. When you spin a magnet then you get electricity, which is a popular way humans make electricity.
Since the Earth's rock has magnetic properties and assuming it spins, could this be a potential source of electricity? Maybe the sun uses this electricity to fuel its thermo nuclear reactions?
-
The Earth's energy comes from heat deep underground the surface. The deepest we have drilled on record is about 7 miles at the Kola superdeep borehole. Boy that lava must be really deep. No one knows how deep because we can't stick a tape measure down there.
Where is the energy "from heat deep underground the surface" released? For it to contribute to heating the surface of the earth it must vent somewhere.
-
Maybe the sun uses this electricity to fuel its thermo nuclear reactions?
I am not an expert on electricity to know if this could be feasible in theory, but thermonuclear reactions require that the sun is huge as otherwise it would run out of hydrogen very quickly.
So in FE the sun has to be burning in some other way. I did not find anything in the wiki on this so please let me know if I am wrong.
-
I don't know the exact process the Sun may use external hydrogen to fuel its inner fusion reactions.
But yes, with an internal hydrogen store, then sun needs to be big! But if the sun is extracting hydrogen from the atmosphere (which it has in abundance) then the sun can be small and localized.
-
From the Sun's atmosphere? There is negligible hydrogen in Earth's atmosphere.
-
I don't know the exact process the Sun may use external hydrogen to fuel its inner fusion reactions.
But yes, with an internal hydrogen store, then sun needs to be big! But if the sun is extracting hydrogen from the atmosphere (which it has in abundance) then the sun can be small and localized.
There is NO hydrogren in the dry atmosphere. There is hydrogen locked up in H20 water vapor (humidity, clouds, water cycle) which is as low as 0% in deserts, 3% in tropical regions. It seems unlikely to me that the Sun is fueled by the humidity of the air.