1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer

« on: November 01, 2019, 11:24:31 PM »

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 29, 2019, 05:49:47 PM »

Since this is a math problem, the observer is just an arbitrary reference point, so colliding with the flat earth isn't an issue.

I'm not interested in hypothetical thought experiments.

Interesting, because much of SR and GR are built on insights gained from hypothetical thought experiments, not the least of which being the equivalence principle which FE'ers often use as evidence supporting Universal Acceleration.

There exists no observable frame of reference in which your supposed contradiction would present itself. Until you can negotiate that issue, your objection is a non-starter.

I'm sorry but I didn't realize that I supposedly contradicted anything.  I'm simply trying to establish a frame of reference from which the speed of the accelerating flat earth can be calculated.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 29, 2019, 05:33:03 PM »

Okay, then please use that frame of reference to calculate how fast the flat earth would be traveling after 5000 years of accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s².

Non-applicable. The observer would collide with the Earth much sooner than that.

Since this is a math problem, the observer is just an arbitrary reference point, so colliding with the flat earth isn't an issue.  It's the changing velocity of the FE as it approaches, meets and then moves beyond that reference point that's relevant.  In this case, it's a question of how fast the FE would be moving 5000 years after passing that arbitrary reference point.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 29, 2019, 03:29:29 PM »

That is essentially what I found at the NPR site...

I know.  I was just providing a link to the original source of the policy on the DoJ web site, not a second hand retelling of it.  Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 29, 2019, 03:16:27 PM »

Here it is from the DoJ itself:

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:

The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

Attachment:
op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf

6

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 29, 2019, 02:07:45 PM »

In what frame of reference is the FE accelerating?

It is accelerating relative to an observer positioned a small distance above the Earth, and thus unaffected by Dark Energy.

Okay, then please use that frame of reference to calculate how fast the flat earth would be traveling after 5000 years of accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s².

Why only 5,000?  Are flat earthers also Young Earth Creationists?

Why not 5000?  Pretty much any arbitrary time span greater than about 10 years of acceleration at 1g should produce a value pretty close to c.  Since a lot of RE'ers don't understand the finer points of acceleration and frames of reference under special relativity, I'm just trying to get Pete (or anyone else willing) to teach us how to pick an appropriate frame of reference for the calculation and (hopefully) move the discussion along.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 29, 2019, 01:52:03 PM »

In what frame of reference is the FE accelerating?

It is accelerating relative to an observer positioned a small distance above the Earth, and thus unaffected by Dark Energy.

Okay, then please use that frame of reference to calculate how fast the flat earth would be traveling after 5000 years of accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s².

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 29, 2019, 01:44:14 PM »

Nope. I am arguing the following: Lord Dave wrote, (essentially) if Trump murdered me or raped my dead mother he would not arrested or charged because he is a sitting President.

That is demonstrably false and he has yet to provide any evidence for his statement.

When was that demonstrated to be false?

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 29, 2019, 01:08:09 AM »

As v approaches c

In what frame of reference do you believe v would approach c?

In what frame of reference is the FE accelerating?

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 28, 2019, 01:52:52 AM »

There are several quotes in the link from scale authorities stating that it does highly affect scales.

Do any of those quotes quantify the effect on the scales? 

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: On The Subject of Gravity

« on: July 27, 2019, 11:39:11 PM »

What equations? Show, using weight of atmosphere, humidity, air viscosity, temperature, and all other elements in the environment which scale authorities say highly affects scales, that it does not affect a scale by a fraction of one percent.

Since it's your claim that the atmosphere can affect weight, isn't it your responsibility to support that claim with evidence?

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 26, 2019, 02:03:04 PM »

As of right now, Trump is in the clear.

That is the definition of exonerate.

Not quite:

exonerate
verb [ T ]
formal uk ​ /ɪɡˈzɒn.ə.reɪt/ us ​ /ɪɡˈzɑː.nɚ.eɪt/

to show or state that someone or something is not guilty of something:

Again, not charged yet is not the same as exonerated.

I am unsure of how you come to the conclusion Trump has not been charged.

Charges of everything, from being racist to a pedophile to obstruction of justice, have been leveled against him for over 30 years.

Of course, none of it is true, but you need to look at the left for why they continue to pursue the victim stance when the citizens of the US have had their fill of this baloney.

In case you haven't been keeping up, I'm talking about how Trump not being indicted or charged by the Mueller team does not mean that the Mueller team exonerated Trump. 

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2019, 08:07:36 PM »

Trump showing off the new presidential seal?

14

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Problems with the Heliocentric Model

« on: July 25, 2019, 07:49:23 PM »

So what happened in 1919 that allowed Einsteinian relativity to be described as proven when the aether medium was still taught in1921?

In 1919, Arthur Eddington took some photos of a total solar eclipse and showed that the background stars had exhibited signs of gravitational lensing as predicted by general relativity.  It usually takes a while for latest scientific theories to make it into the text books and school curriculums.

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2019, 03:22:34 PM »

As of right now, Trump is in the clear.

That is the definition of exonerate.

Not quite:

exonerate
verb [ T ]
formal uk ​ /ɪɡˈzɒn.ə.reɪt/ us ​ /ɪɡˈzɑː.nɚ.eɪt/

to show or state that someone or something is not guilty of something:

Again, not charged yet is not the same as exonerated.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2019, 01:18:54 PM »

Because a person not indicted can continue to lay claim that state of being all they want.

I am exonerated.

You are exonerated.

ALL GOD'S CHILDREN ARE EXONERATED!!!

Not being indicted is not the same as being exonerated.  If Trump says that the report exonerates him, then he is lying.  Simple as that.

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 24, 2019, 04:43:26 PM »

From Mueller's testimony today:

In the opening minutes of the hearing, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, asked Mueller about Trump’s claims of vindication in the investigation.

“Did you actually totally exonerate the president?” Nadler asked.

“No,” Mueller replied.

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Elevator question

« on: July 24, 2019, 01:15:07 PM »

On the other hand, warping space-time is an innate property of matter and energy.

That seems like a convenient way to avoid explaining how gravity gets to be an infinite attractive 'force (acceleration).

As opposed to just ignoring the source of the UA? 

BTW, according to Einstein, gravity/gravitation is not a force.  It's simply the natural movement of an object through warped space-time.

For another thing, acceleration implies that the FE and the accompanying visible universe is going somewhere.  Where is the FE universe going and what will happen when it gets there?

I fail to see that implication.

Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity.  Velocity is speed in a direction.  Speed is the rate of change of distance per unit time.  If the FE is accelerating upwards, then it must be moving upwards.  Again, where is the FE universe going is such a hurry?

19

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Elevator question

« on: July 24, 2019, 03:26:25 AM »

Why would an infinite upward acceleration be any less plausible than an infinite inward acceleration? Both seem to be active rather than passive.

Well, for one thing, upwards acceleration requires a nigh infinite energy source.  Where is the source of that all that energy?  Does the distance squared rule apply?  On the other hand, warping space-time is an innate property of matter and energy.

For another thing, acceleration implies that the FE and the accompanying visible universe is going somewhere.  Where is the FE universe going and what will happen when it gets there?

20

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Elevator question

« on: July 24, 2019, 12:29:01 AM »

Just because we may or may not have had this discussion before, that doesn't necessarily mean that I ever got a satisfactory answer out of you.

Indeed. Now, please do stay on topic and take your amateurish trolling attempts to the lower echelons.

Sure thing Pete.

Would anyone else care to explain why an active upwards acceleration lasting for many, many years should be more plausible than a relatively passive phenomenon like gravity/gravitation?