Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Regicide

Pages: [1]
Flat Earth Theory / Something odd about magnets
« on: August 25, 2021, 11:30:21 PM »
This question isn’t specifically about the Flat Earth or Round Earth debate, but ties into a common argument, namely the existence of gravity. Many Flat Earthers reject the existence of gravity because they don’t believe that there can be an invisible force- they ask for someone, anyone, to show them gravity. The most common alternate explanation involves a universal accelerator. However, while gravity is difficult to demonstrate due to its comparative weakness, I can give several examples of invisible forces that are observable on a small scale and lack truly complete explanations in both theories. I’m talking about magnetism and static charge. Gravity, as I said before is a comparatively weak force. This can be seen through the action of a fridge magnet- this tiny chunk of ferrous material has enough power to overcome the full gravitational force of the earth. We’re all taught how magnets supposedly work, of course- there’s a magnetic field, emitted from the magnet’s north pole to the south pole. Opposite poles attract each other, while like poles repel. This is known. What we don’t really know is how. It’s not like the opposite poles want to be together. They aren’t sentient. They have no agency, no means of moving together. There’s no visible interaction or subatomic interaction. They just, through an invisible and baffling force, move together. I’m sure there are explanations, but I challenge you to find one that doesn’t in some way involve invisible forces. So anyway. I await your answers.

Flat Earth Community / What are your codified Flat Earth Beliefs?
« on: August 14, 2021, 10:21:02 PM »
There's not really one Flat Earth Theory. What I've seen instead is a great many theories with one common unifier, a central tenet- that the Earth is flat.
This can sometimes make it challenging to understand what people are arguing, and how to reply. To help with this, I've decided to start this thread, for anyone who wants to explain their beliefs and the way they explain certain facts about the Earth. I'm including a list of questions, which you are free to use or ignore. It would be especially helpful if some of the more prominent posters (I'm looking at you, J-Man!) could take the time to reply to this. Thanks!

I understand that there will be some surprised reactions to the answers to these questions. To avoid this thread getting cluttered, however, could you kindly undertake lines of inquiry/criticize other people's personal beliefs in a seperate thread? Thanks!

--Questions Follow--

1. Do you believe the Earth is flat?

2. Which map do you personally subscribe to? Unipolar, bipolar, or something else?

3. What orbit does the sun take?

4. Why do constellations look different, depending on location?

5. Why do seasons happen?

6. Is Nasa lying to us?

7. Is the government lying to us?

8. Which organizations are lying to us?

9. Is there a global conspiracy to cover up the flat earth?

10. If you said yes to 9, why?

11. If you said yes to 9, when did this conspiracy start?

12. What's your favorite brand of crisps/chips?

13. Can people visit Antarctica?

14. How did the Flat Earth begin?

15. Why do ships disappear over the horizon?

16. Do you have any other questions you'd like to see in this list?

Flat Earth Projects / Wiki Contradictions: be careful who you quote!
« on: January 26, 2021, 03:19:56 PM »
Was scrolling through the wiki, in the Coriolis effect article, when I found this gem.

In those highly controlled settings, scientists at MIT in the 1960s were able to show that Coriolis could work on a draining tub. In fact, I have been told that graduate students at MIT still do this experiment today in one of their classes.

Tom, if you're going to cherrypick quotes, at least have the sense to:

1. Remove the sections that count against FET
2. At least attempt to address the questions raised.

Flat Earth Investigations / Southern Cross
« on: January 22, 2021, 02:54:56 PM »
A while back I had a bit of a look at the logistics of Polaris, and was disappointed to find that, provided there is some force pulling light away from Earth,  a Flat Earth can provide an explanation for Polaris. However, having lived in the Southern hemisphere as well as the Northern hemisphere, I happen to know that the South has it's own Polaris. Enter, the Southern cross.

A constellation that is visible year-round from the Southern hemisphere, and basically only from the southern hemisphere (It sometimes peeks over the horizon in the north.) The south doesn't have a star over the south pole, but there are certainly constellations there as well, and the Southern cross is perhaps the most famous.  So here is my question: let us say that the sun is rising in Australia and setting in Argentina. Both countries can see the southern cross, and both see it due south.

This would work in the bipolar model, but would not work (as far as I can see) in the unipolar model. So, let's see what we can find for this one, eh?

Flat Earth Investigations / Let's do a Cavendish Experiment
« on: January 21, 2021, 02:57:10 PM »
Flat Earthers and Round Earthers seem to disagree on a few points. One of these is gravity, which is essential for Round Earth Theory and anethema to Flat Earth Theory... or at least the current one. Luckily, there is quite a simple way to measure gravity: The Cavendish Experiment. There are a few videos of Cavendish experiments available, mostly performed by teachers in less than perfect environments. So, rather than performing a simple experiment and then dissolving into disagreement over fine points, let's come to a consensus on how to perform a controlled Cavendish experiment and then execute that plan. Let's please keep this on topic and civil: this is an investigation, not a debate. I'll list all of the things I can think of to control:

Air currents: With the weak forces experienced by the objects in a Cavendish experiment, any outside perturbation is enough to disturb a system. Thus, it is best to control air currents, either by performing the experiment in a vacuum, or if that proves impractical, testing a control with objects of the same shape but a lower mass.

Magnetism: The test needs to be performed with weights which do not experience magnetism, and for that matter won't exude a static charge either.

Place of rest needs to be found.: The original Cavendish experiment was performed not to prove the existence of gravity, although gravity is needed for it to work. Rather, it was performed to find the gravitational constant, which it did so with remarkable accuracy. It did this by suspending the weights from a long wire, and allowing them to rotate. This of course twisted the wire, which introduced a torsion force into the system. By finding how far the weights are from the height of equilibrium when they come to rest, a gravitational force can be found. The best way in my mind to perform this would be to place a digital dial gauge under the beam and allowing the beam to spin back and forth without external weights. The lowest height it reaches should be the place of rest.

With all these in mind, I'll do the first procedure writeup, which will doubtless be modified.

1. Suspend a wire (exact length, gauge, and material TBD) from the ceiling (Could be performed in a large empty space, such as an empty gymnasium to minimize outside gravitational influences, or could be performed in a vacuum chamber if it's practical.
2. On the end of the wire, attach a beam (properties TBD) and to either side attach a weight of mass (TBD). Allow the system to rest for one hour.
3. Place a digital dial gauge under the beam so that it is measuring the height of the beam, and rotate the beam 90 degrees without allowing the wire to swing. Release and plot the height over the next (length of time TBD).
4. With the equilibrium height established, allow the system to come to rest at equilibrium. Place two empty containers of volume (TBD) (TBD m/cm) away, on scales of which the mass is already known. Wait one hour and measure the change in height of the beam.
5. Fill the containers with (material of extremely high density: lead, stone, etc.), so that the mass of each container is (TBD). Wait until the system reaches equilibrium and measure the height.
6. Remove the containers and allow the system to return to equilibrium.

If the height with the high mass containers is different to the equilibrium height without containers, then gravity exists.

Let's do this.

Pages: [1]