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.


Messages - jack44556677

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12  Next >
41
Cooling by light or sound is not as unusual as it intuitively seems.

It is unclear, in the measurements I’ve seen - mostly taken outside, whether moonlight has the effect that is claimed / ostensibly observed.

The “insulation effect” iceman described is certainly possible, and to get to the bottom of it would require controlling for that.

If you could conduct the observations all inside / in a styrofoam cooler and selectively let moonlight in and block it (of course doing proper “controls” of opening and closing said aperture and monitoring the effect on the temperature with and without moonlight when the outside temperature was the same) then you could start to figure it out.

Did any of the procedures you saw do that, to certainly demonstrate that the moonlight was the cause of the cooling (and not just the effect of the lack of thermal “blanket” of the shade)?  The ones I have seen do not control for what iceman is saying, and they really should!

42
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 07, 2021, 02:03:06 PM »
So, once again, you have nothing to back up your typical pontification.  At least you're consistent.

You misunderstand.  I do not come here to feed others, but to encourage fishing instead!

I could source and cite all day long, and that would perhaps convince more - but it is across purposes to my ends.  I don’t want to convince; I want to encourage independent thought and research!

Perhaps if you did a little research on the gyroscope you might find some support (or perhaps refutation) for my “pontification”? Autodidacticism is not optional in this subject (nor any other).

43
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 07, 2021, 01:47:19 PM »
I would say this is an example of trolling.  When you answer a statement, backed up by all the known laws of physics, with an answer pulled out of your imagination to incite the opposing debater to answer with malice and attempt to divert the discussion away from a point that you have no suitable answer for.  Nice try, but no joy here. 

I avoid inciting malice whenever possible. I am not intending to divert or cause offense and sincerely apologize if that has been your experience.  My experience has been that the reflexive anger that often manifests when one is talking/potentially learning about things they strongly disagree with is a defense mechanism designed to curtail evaluation. I am a heretic, and I attack belief which often has this effect to believers (to keep their beliefs safe, and prevent further discussion, evaluation, and collaboration with said heretic)

Quote
You can learn all this for yourself (if you have sufficient imagination) by looking at some of the gyroscope technical manuals.


Imagination does not lie in any book, perhaps technical manuals and marketing material least of all, nor is it required to fill your head with the imaginings of others.

 
Quote
All of my statements have been from personal experience and real world observations while on the job.

I appreciate that, and sincerely wish to cause you no offense.  I wish to disagree with your interpretation of those observations, not belittle your experience (nor any other aspect of your personage).

Quote
I would challenge you to get a gyroscope of your own and do some experiments with it.  Show us just why a gyroscope cannot indicate that the earth is actually rotating

I like gyroscopes a lot, and have several.  In particular, I found eric laithwaite’s exploration and the development of the “exhaustless inertial drive” fascinating.  I encourage others to remain as curious and uncertain as they did, and to learn more about the things that captivate them.

 
Quote
If you just make some inciteful proclamations and expect someone to believe it, then you will be sadly disappointed.

I expect nor wish anyone to believe anything (that I or anyone else ever says).  I eschew belief, because it has no place in knowledge (least of all scientific).  All claims/“facts” must be thoroughly validated/verified before accepting them as knowledge and I do not seek to remove this crucial and neglected burden from any student (quite the opposite!)

Quote
My imagination tells me that the Easter Bunny is a complete myth.  ... You can BELEIVE in the Easter Bunny but KNOW there is a Santa.

Imagination is not the prerequisite for knowledge, but the prerequisite for possibilities! All imaginings (claims, “facts”, reasonings etc.), all possibilities need to be thoroughly validated/tested before they can be thought confirmed. When applicable, the scientific method is the best we have to perform such validation (and even then, the knowledge is provisional and doomed to eventual expiration)

44
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 07, 2021, 01:10:17 PM »
Wow. Are you going to back that up with any credible source to substantiate that completely made up claim?

Not all claims (or in this case, historical facts) are “made up” just because you are unfamiliar with them.

It’s in the word itself! Gyro-scope!  I encourage you to do some research on the gyroscope, its origin as well as the etymology of the word.

45
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 06, 2021, 05:29:34 PM »
The earth rotates, as measured by gyros, as does the atmosphere above it.

This is what we are taught, yes.  In reality that isn’t reasonable, nor consistent with what we observe.  The gyroscope shows deflection, not the shape or motion of the world.  The gyroscope was invented to do precisely that, convince people the world was rotating - and it worked to convince a great many.

Quote
If it were not, how could a big puffy cloud stay mostly stationary relative to an observer on the ground?

Because it is mostly stationary relative to an observer, not “coincidentally” traveling at the same speed of the ground (which is silly).  Wind happens all the time, varying at altitudes and is not related to the presumed rotation of the world.

Quote
Wouldn't a gyroscope floating up thru that same cloud on a balloon register the same rotation rate as the one on the earth below?

Of course not.  That’s like assuming that something that is forced to rotate while on the merry-go-round will continue to do so once they step off of it - into a hot air balloon if you wish. (The hot air balloon can also be riding the merry go round if you so desire)

46
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 06, 2021, 05:18:56 PM »
What do you mean by 'connected'? Are you suggesting that a ship at sea, or an aircraft in the air, is not affected by the rotation of the earth?

I am suggesting that, yes.  More so in the case of the airplane, due to the viscosity of the medium.  The supposed rotation of the world would be expected to alter greatly when you were touching it vs when you were no longer touching it and only potentially feeling its influence through an intermediary non-solid media.

Quote
How would systemic friction be related to a function of the user's latitude?

What if the drift nut is there to accommodate constant friction, AND there were something else causing varying deflection on top of that? Of course there are many other possibilities. I encourage you to use your imagination, and to avoid the cul de sac of “what I know, and/or was taught, must be right / is the only possibility”.

Quote
Again, you seem to think that being in the sky (or sea?) somehow disconnects the system from the planet's rotation. That simply isn't the case. The earth, the sea, the atmosphere - the whole thing is rotating.

In your belief, yes.  In reality, likely not.  Even if they did all rotate, they would not (and do not) rotate as one due to the mechanical properties of the medias themselves.  The jet stream travels faster than the presumed rotation of the earth, and in the wrong direction.  It is very silly to think that everything would rotate as one, but it is one of those fantastically silly things we learn by rote under the guise of education.  It is in part to handle/rationalize the paradox that helicopters, balloons, and drones pose to the rotating globe model.
 
Quote
That's a cop out - let's hear your actual explanation, and not some hint, shrouded in mystery.

I’m not intending to provide mystery. I’m providing criticism and encouragement to use ones imagination.  While providing criticism I am under no obligation (nor is anyone) to provide an alternative to what is being rightly criticized.  However, in the process of calibration I am suggesting that the systemic frictions of the mechanical system (when the gyro is mechanical and has a drift nut) as well as another influencer on the gyro are intended to be factored out as well as possible to maintain fixed bearing.

It is not the data that is in question, it is the interpretation of that data contingent on unvalidated assumption.

47
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 06, 2021, 09:40:55 AM »
But Jack, we've been here before. We've talked about gyros, for example - we had a deep conversation about drift nuts in directional gyros, which correct for the drift error caused by the earth's rotation - 15 degrees per hour multiplied by the sine of the latitude. I showed you some links too - you can see for yourself. There's also plenty more information about the various other types of gyro error.

We did discuss drift nuts and gyro function, which I am all too happy to do.  These things make ronj’s “theoretical” data more problematic, not less.  The deflection witnessed (and relied upon) in gyros and pendulums is not a significant part of the current discussion - and the absurdity required to expect a drift nut to function (or be consistent) while NOT connected to the supposed rotating earth is pretty apparent.

Quote
What possible physical layout of our planet could possibly account for such an error, other than a rotating globe?

You misunderstand, the physical layout of the planet (should such a thing there be) is not what causes such errors.  Nor is measuring a gyro’s deflection a way to measure the shape of the world.  It is merely believed to be, based on scores of other unvalidated assumptions. 

Quote
If this stuff wasn't real

No one in this conversation is saying it isn’t.  It is the belief over why that is in contention.

Quote
15 degrees per hour multiplied by the sine of the latitude is not a random error - there has to be a physical explanation for it.

I agree.  However you are incorrect that (ignoring other impacts to the gyro) friction could not manifest in such a way.  Noise is random, systemic friction is not.  Your certainty stems from lack of imagination as to alternatives.

 
Quote
It would make no sense at all on a flat earth - what is special about the equator that would cause the error to be zero, for example?

Musing on that question can be helpful.  The deflection (and rate thereof) suggests that something is rotating, though that thing need not be the earth.  If the deflection occurs when disconnected from the earth (such as in flight, for instance), that is strong evidence that the earth (and its supposed rotation) is not, in fact, the cause.

Quote
Doesn't this stuff give you cause to think 'maybe it is a globe after all?'.

Once upon a time, before I had conducted adequate research to verify/validate such claims (and the larger tapestry of which they are a part, and dependent upon for potential inference on the shape of the world) - yes.  You are getting hung up by believing that your learned interpretation of the data (which does not itself alter) is the only possible one.  This is due chiefly to lack of imagination.

48
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 04, 2021, 05:44:27 PM »
This is just another polite way of saying "I don't care how much data you have or what your measuring instruments are, don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up".

Not at all! The main point is that you don’t have that data.  Furthermore, if you did we would still have to discuss the interpretation of it - which is heavily contingent on preexisting bias.

Quote
The next question then would be:  Would you be willing to stake you life on what you think you KNOW?  I KNOW the earth is spherical, I've confirmed it, and on that I'm willing to bet my life on what I KNOW.  Sailors do it often.

My certainty varies with specific fact/knowledge, as with all of us.  The shape of the world is not part of sailing, the skills to sail are.  I know that you ardently believe the world is spherical, and are willing to “bet your life” on that faith - however that is very different and distinct from your sailing knowledge and ability!

Quote
Those who live in their mother's basement don't and frequently troll just for fun.  Do you KNOW that?

Lol, ad hom will not help you understand or be understood (quite the opposite!).

In fairness, I don’t like the trolls either (regardless of where they live or how much income, or sailing experience, they have).  I will not troll you, nor anyone if I can help it.  I can only hope to convey my sincerity adequately through repeated interaction.  I come here for rational discourse above all else.

49
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 04, 2021, 05:29:08 PM »
Yet you reject any conclusion that has been reached by application of the scientific method.

Quite the opposite! However it will take time and your earnest interest to recognize that.

Quote
You judging anybody for being "vain", is just too rich.  ::)

My statement was inclusive, not exclusive. It is OUR vain beliefs that we struggle against when we endeavor to be objective/scientific.  Our intuition/belief/bias most often gets in the way of that.

50
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: May 03, 2021, 02:26:11 PM »
When you live on a globe earth the observed horizon will always be flat unless you are very high up in an airplane.  Commercial passenger aircraft just don't get to a sufficient altitude to make a meaningful observation of any curvature.

Incorrect.  I was mistaught this as well.  The horizon does not curve at any altitude attainable (including high altitude balloon).  This does not have necessary bearing on the shape of the world; it's simply a demonstrable and reasonably repeatable/observable fact.

One of the reasons we were taught that tripe was to bolster belief (not knowledge) in the globe model.  Often the bs (which is not to say certainly "lies") came directly from nasa which consistently continued to claim, decade after decade for approaching 3/4 of a century now, "it's just a little bit further than you can get to, but trust us - it's totally there". 

Part of the misconception/misunderstanding is somewhat innocent, as lens distortion causes the effect that makes the horizon appear to curve (when it clearly, and logically, doesn't).

Quote
KNOWING something is great but that doesn't mean that it is correct.

Agreed.  Generally/historically speaking, humanity is always wrong about everything.

Quote
In that case it would be much better to BELIEVE in something that's actually correct!

Belief is for fools, wisdom (generalized knowledge) for the wise.  The chances of our vain self-serving belief being correct are consistently infentessimal, and we know this from validating/verifying/testing them over millenia.  The scientific method is carefully crafted to avoid the natural and default self-delusion that belief constitutes.

Quote
If you take a ship out to sea with access to a couple of very high quality gyroscopes and inspect them day after day as part of your job and actually measure the curvature of the sea, and the earth the water is lying on,  would that process result in KNOWING or BELIEVING?

You would know that gyroscopes precess in a specific manner, your tendency (which you must resist to do objective study and learn / obtain knowledge) will be to believe that you have measured the water curving which is itself a conclusion contingent on much more assumption/bias/belief you swallowed long ago. (Like that you understand all the sources influencing the precession of the gyroscopes, for one)


Quote
Those measurements, and many others, from completely different gyros on different ships, consistently indicate that the surface of the sea is curved in the manner consistent with a globe earth.  Wouldn't it be reasonable to say that I now KNOW that the earth is a sphere ???

I do not mean to be dismissive, but you don't have that data ("those measurements") - nor does anyone.  If you did, and others independently repeated/confirmed your measurements then we could begin to talk about such things (which I personally would find fascinating!).  Without the measurements   - we have little to discuss except your interpretation of them should they happen to exist anywhere outside your heart and mind.

51
Flat Earth Community / Re: i dont understand someone help please
« on: April 16, 2021, 09:05:43 PM »
I'm, not a flat earth believer btw.

That's good! Avoid becoming one! Belief is what got us into this mess in the first place. Belief has no place in knowledge/fact, least of all scientific, and is directly across purposes to objective study of any kind. Seek to KNOW instead!

Quote
okay so ik you guys believe if the horizon is flat then the earth is flat.

Some do, others do not. There is little uniformity/consensus across flat earth researchers because they are largely independent researchers with varying approaches and conclusions.  People believe the horizon should curve (and the earth is spherical) because they were conditioned by rote under the guise of education to believe that.  The reverse belief is not much better.

Quote
when you go on an airplane and look through the window you can see there is a slight curve which you can see even better from a wider view.

I highly recommend reading the wiki here! It will address many of your common questions (and misconceptions).  It is not a bible, nor a textbook - but a compilation of many, often disparate, ideas from varying researchers.

The horizon does not curve at any attainable altitude or fov.  You can observe this yourself (as many others have) for around 100 bucks.

Quote
someone please explain this to me

Read the wiki!  Water's surface at rest does not curve the way the globe model requires, the meniscus is a miniscule surface tension artifact and not relevant.

52
Flat Earth Theory / Re: My Happiest Thought
« on: April 16, 2021, 08:45:05 PM »

I can answer that for you.  The FErs won't listen.


That's not true, it is the FAITHFUL that won't listen (or rather, hear/understand)

If you have FAITH (aka belief) that the world is spherical (or flat/any shape) and "spacetime" is real, you are conditioned not to listen.  Overcoming that is not easy, and requires objective study and the interest to learn things that contradict what you were conditioned into believing by rote under the guise of education.

Repetition was used to solidify the belief, and must be used to undo it.

I recommend re-reading tom's posts in this thread without a "debunker" bias and asking questions if you don't understand (or disagree).  Try imagining that you may have been misinformed, and that other conceptions may be just as effective at describing what we observe.  In science this constantly happens; it is just a question of how long before we recognize it. Your faith will encourage you strongly not to do such things, but objective study/evaluation/science requires it.

Tom's detailed explanation is much more in depth than I would have given, and worth rereading and considering.  I would have just explained that time is complete fiction (has no reality beyond thermodynamic change, a unidirectional process), as is "spacetime". Even einstein himself began to doubt his "castle in the sky" towards the end.

53
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Let's do ships again
« on: April 12, 2021, 02:51:20 PM »
I would suggest the 'visible horizon' is as indicated by my text in the first photo, with the green lines. Agree?

Certainly. The horizon is where the sky and surface (water in this case) appear to meet.  By "beyond the visible horizon", I mean the distant object (or some part of it) is no longer visible and appears to be "behind" the horizon.

Quote
I would also suggest that three of the boats/ships are nearer than the horizon, and that only one, the one in the circle, is 'on the horizon'. Agree?

Sure.

54
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Let's do ships again
« on: April 12, 2021, 02:41:10 PM »
Nobody said the boat was beyond the visible horizon.

That's true.  It was just a hypothetical question.

Quote
Just the fact that we can see the boat means it's NOT beyond the visible horizon.

Not exactly.  There are examples of things that are beyond the visible horizon becoming visible when the conditions are right.

The idea that the ghostly horizon is the real one and the distinct/clear horizon is a "false" one is not typically how this illusion is understood.

55
Flat Earth Community / Re: Questions for flat earth
« on: April 12, 2021, 02:01:34 PM »
@scomato

I could, but why should I bother?

As I said, I am not the first researcher to perform an iconographic study of "aliens" over time.

It is an interesting subject, and I would not wish to deprive you of the independent research excercise that most severely need. 

Besides; my findings might bias you to ignore the data - perhaps I'm wrong!

Do your own research.  It is not optional, and it pays dividends.

If you earnestly lack the independent research ability to do so, I'd be happy to point you in the right direction.

56
Flat Earth Theory / Re: My Happiest Thought
« on: April 09, 2021, 03:19:35 AM »
You appear to be referring to this:

http://gravityprobe.org/GravityProbe%20Links/Galileo-Undone-Mar-10-2020.pdf



That's the one. I spent an embarrassingly long time searching through old posts for it (I thought it was black and white too, memory can leave things to be desired...)

Thanks a lot!

57
Flat Earth Theory / Re: My Happiest Thought
« on: April 08, 2021, 01:35:40 PM »
@fisherman

"The equivalence principle tells us that accelerated motion and gravity are indistinguishable."

Not really, but this is a common misconception.

They are, in fact, easily distinguishable :  tom has an excellent diagram showing this in a hanging, falling, and resting water balloon that, despite my best efforts, I couldn't find :(

Gravity does not equal acceleration.

Please do not let this diminish your happiness!

58
Flat Earth Theory / Re: About the conspiracy
« on: March 30, 2021, 05:45:55 PM »
Hi
I've been reading about Flat Earth Theory since a long time now

You seem to have missed the wiki here!

It does a good job of helping to clear up some of your, common, misconceptions.

The shape of the world has no dependency on "conspiracy" nor does determining the shape of it with certainty.

No conspiracy is required for humanity to be stupid and wrong as it historically always is!  We require no assistance!

59
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth Predictive Capabilities
« on: March 30, 2021, 04:17:43 PM »
None of that is true.

Can you provide a source which backs up any of that?

Why does that matter when you already "know" it isn't true in your heart?

The source is the historical records of that pope and the astronomers pitching heliocentrism to him.

Contrary to what is commonly (mis)taught, heliocentrism was not chosen to replace geocentrism because it "modeled observation" better.  It was argued at the time that physics and science need not be considered, and the "beauty"/simplicity of the equations was all that was needed.

60
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth Predictive Capabilities
« on: March 29, 2021, 01:43:09 PM »
like the heliocentric model replaced the geocentric one when it was found to be a better model of reality.

That isn't what happened.  They argued and ultimately convinced the pope to ignore physics and science to switch to the "new model". It was not a "better model of reality".

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12  Next >