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 - Boots

Pages: < Back  1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24  Next >
421
Flat Earth Theory / Re: FE Questioning
« on: October 23, 2016, 10:30:34 AM »
Thanks for taking your time for answering my questions.

Now, to wait for a FE to answer my questions.

Good luck with that. As CableDawg said they will just point you to a bunch of material - often long, rambling, poorly done and heavily biased youtube vids.

If you want to know the theory better you can look in the library or the wiki. Most of it is based on a book 100 years ago. The theory hasn't advanced much since then as far as I can see.

422
Telling other people what the moral thing to do is, is the same as saying "my opinion is more correct than yours" which is, by definition, gibberish.

I can't believe these are the words uttered by seemingly intelligent adults. Especially you, Rushy.

Why should a baby in the womb have to pay with its life for your mistakes?

I am a strong supporter of the rights of the defenseless, unborn child. All the women in my life are equally strong supporters of this position, if not stronger.

423
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The South Celestial Pole
« on: October 22, 2016, 03:01:59 AM »
The educational system in turkey leaves much to desire, it seems.

The educational system depends on according to opinion of atheist / satanist /NASA. So it means nothing. The only reality is IQ's of 160.  :)

Do not worry. After i prove gravitation's fake, all you will get like educated.  ;)
What has that to do with "The South Celestial Pole"?

Who cares! I want to see his proofs of this gravity hoax people are talking about!

I totally agree. The South Celestial Pole is a fascinating topic but I will definitely be distracted if İntikam starts proving that gravitation is fake.

424
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 21, 2016, 01:06:42 PM »
note that this is on "the other Flat Earth Society" at
The Flat Earth Society - you would find that Society "quite different!"

I tried to sign up but the sign up icon just links to the forum index page.

425
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Bishop Experiment in the Wiki
« on: October 20, 2016, 10:26:33 PM »
Here are the facts regardless of bias. Given the information we have so far, the experiment under discussion is not valid.
You have presented nothing to suggest that. Sorry. Asserting your convictions over and over won't progress this conversation.

Either the information given in this thread is incorrect or the experiment under discussion is invalid. It is not logically possible to accept the information as given and accept the experiment under discussion as valid. (IF  "Lovers Point Beach does not have a view of Lighthouse Beach. It is facing the wrong direction." THEN the experiment is not valid.) Perhaps TNR is wrong in his assertion, but so far, no one has challenged that assertion. Thus I am basing my statements on the information given so far.

426
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Bishop Experiment in the Wiki
« on: October 20, 2016, 09:08:15 PM »
Here are the facts regardless of bias. Given the information we have so far, the experiment under discussion is not valid. There may be other similar experiments with results which do support the same conclusion(no curvature). But this one does not.

I believe that there have been such experiments but I am definitely biased toward the idea that these results were due to refraction and not a flat earth. I have noticed that many of these experiments are done close to the water. That, I am beginning to think, is not a good place to do them. I suggest doing them as high off the water as is practical.

427
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 20, 2016, 02:02:18 PM »

But I cannot get any Flat Earthed to take thus "time dilation", as it is called, seriously. The nearest to an answer is the claim that there is not proof that there is a "part of the universe that is not accelerating with us".

This is hard to comprehend. What about the space we are supposedly accelerating through? If it is accelerating with us than how can we be accelerating through it?

Quote
I like to claim that this proves that this flat earth must be 42 years old (and you will realise the significance of 42 if you have read or seen "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy", a comedy science fiction series created by Douglas Adams). My 42 years is just as fictitious as "The Hitchhiker's Guide", by the way.

I made a post on this topic in Flat Earth Q&A / Re: gravity « Message by rabinoz on April 09, 2016, 02:17:43 AM »

I read it. LOL. In that thread I read something else that puzzled me:

Quote from: The Wiki, Tidal Effects
Q: Why does gravity vary with altitude?
A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.

What? I thought the whole point was that the idea of bodies of mass attracting each other through the vacuum of space was absurd.


428
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 20, 2016, 07:03:25 AM »
You will find that FE'ers don't believe in Einstein's theories, but will use part of his works where it suits them; they will not believe in dark matter, but then could use it as part of the theory on how the earth accelerates;  don't believe in satellites and Google maps, but use them to illustrate lens distortion and distances between places on earth; so I leave the conclusion to your judgement.
We cannot reach the speed of light , but we cannot slow the acceleration or people would start becoming weightless, but at least they haven't thought of the solution that the flat earth is in the gravitational orbit of a central God's 'planet', at a constant orbital acceleration of 9.8 mps. Oops, maybe someone will now use this!

Yes. A similar thought has been going through my mind. Isn't the flat earth philosophy to take no ones word for it and believe only what one can see with one's own eyes. The theory of special relativity and "dark energy" seem like fairly complicated concepts. I think most people, FE and GE alike are just taking Einstein's and the scientific community's word for it when it come to his theories of relativity.

429
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 20, 2016, 06:48:40 AM »
Thanks for the response. I would like to understand Einstein's theory of relativity better. Asking these questions is helping me to understand it better. (I think/hope.)

But the way I see it now, if the speed of light is some finite distance per unit of time, and the earth is infinitely accelerating, it seems inevitable that at some point the speed of light will be exceeded. (Infinity > x  where x is a finite number)For sure from the perspective of a fixed position in space. I too believe that the velocity would be limited to c. Which is why it does not seem to me that infinite acceleration is possible. At any rate, if that was the case, I guess the sun moon and stars would also be infinitely accelerating in the same direction or we would soon leave them in the space dust.

Also, doesn't this just create a bigger problem? What is causing this acceleration? it seems like it would be something as hard or harder to believe than the theory of gravity.
I'll answer the last part first. You ask
"Also, doesn't this just create a bigger problem? What is causing this acceleration? it seems like it would be something as hard or harder to believe than the theory of gravity."
                 About all I can say is, in my humble opinion, yes, "dark energy", whatever that is and yes, I find gravity much easier to believe.
But (there's always a but) gravity caused by a finite diameter (24,900 miles) flat earth would point down in the centre (their North pole), but as the edge was approached it would start to point not quite down, but have component pointing in towards the centre as well. On earth gravity is always down, at right angles to to the surface.

So flat earthers have to deny gravity, even though in my opinion it is well supported by evidence and measurements. So, Newton, Cavendish and others often get demonised.

As to explaining relativity, it's a big topic.

The need for something like relativity probably arise with James Clerk Maxwell's claim that the electromagnetic properties of "space" were independent of location and (uniform) velocity.

Since the velocity of light (electromagnetic radiation) is determined by these properties (magnetic permeability and electrostatic permittivity), the velocity of light must be the same for any observer, no matter what their  (uniform) velocity.

Rather than makin a long post I will give a few references. See what you make of them.
Special Relativity Simplified
SPECIAL RELATIVITY EXPLAINED BY THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS
Special relativity.
There is also this video, I have no idea what it is like, here's hoping it helps
Best of luck! Then there's General Relativity, but that's a whole new ballgame.

Thanks. That was interesting. It is a big topic but in a nutshell, we wouldn't be able to exceed the speed of light because as we approached the speed of light time would slow down? This leads to the conclusion that if the earth is accelerating infinitely, then time must be running slower and slower, relative to that part of the universe that is not accelerating with us.

430
Flat Earth Community / Re: Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 20, 2016, 03:49:08 AM »
I know this has been discussed and I did look up a few threads on it, but I would still like to start a new topic about a specific question I have.

If the speed of light is 299792458 m/s and we assume an acceleration rate of 9.8m/s2, then we should be able to divide (299792458/9.8 )  to come to the conclusion that we will be travelling at the speed of light in 30591067 seconds. Or around 354 days. If this is not the case, I would be very happy if someone would take the time to explain to me what the velocity of the earth would be in m/s after 354 days?
I do not for one minute accept that gravity is caused by "Universal Acceleration", but even Einstein's Special Relativity would limit the velocity to "c".

The earth would appear to earth bound observers to be continually accelerating at 9.8m/s2, but on earth we would have no way of knowing our velocity.
To flat earth dwellers, light would still travel at 299,792,458 m/s, but to an observer in an "inertial reference frame" (that is someone not accelerating) the velocity of earth would appear to approach the speed of light asymptotically.

I have tried to calculate how close the velocity of earth would be to the velocity of light, but any calculation I have tried runs into overflow after a couple of centuries.

There are other implications, but I won't dwell on them now.

Thanks for the response. I would like to understand Einstein's theory of relativity better. Asking these questions is helping me to understand it better. (I think/hope.)

But the way I see it now, if the speed of light is some finite distance per unit of time, and the earth is infinitely accelerating, it seems inevitable that at some point the speed of light will be exceeded. (Infinity > x  where x is a finite number)For sure from the perspective of a fixed position in space. I too believe that the velocity would be limited to c. Which is why it does not seem to me that infinite acceleration is possible. At any rate, if that was the case, I guess the sun moon and stars would also be infinitely accelerating in the same direction or we would soon leave them in the space dust.

Also, doesn't this just create a bigger problem? What is causing this acceleration? it seems like it would be something as hard or harder to believe than the theory of gravity.

431
Flat Earth Community / Is "gravity" caused by infinite acceleration?
« on: October 19, 2016, 09:06:44 PM »
I know this has been discussed and I did look up a few threads on it, but I would still like to start a new topic about a specific question I have.

If the speed of light is 299792458 m/s and we assume an acceleration rate of 9.8m/s2, then we should be able to divide (299792458/9.8 )  to come to the conclusion that we will be travelling at the speed of light in 30591067 seconds. Or around 354 days. If this is not the case, I would be very happy if someone would take the time to explain to me what the velocity of the earth would be in m/s after 354 days?

432
Flat Earth Community / Re: What Flat Earth has done for me.
« on: October 18, 2016, 08:30:20 PM »
I don't know.  It just works.  And that is the beauty of it.  Flat Earth:  the gift that keeps on giving.  Now that I have thought about it:  Since I am not buying pot and candy I have a lot of extra money.  I am able to pay more towards the principle.  Thus, lower credit card debt.  Thank you flat earth!  I always have money in my pockets these days.

Aw I'm so disappointed. I don't consume pot or candy so I guess I won't profit much by believing in a flat earth. I guess I'll just stick with believing in a RE. You had me excited for a bit there!

433
Flat Earth Community / Re: What Flat Earth has done for me.
« on: October 18, 2016, 07:23:50 PM »
I am truly curious. Are you saying that all these positive changes in your life occurred as a result of being introduced to the concept of a flat earth or are you simply stating that these changes have occurred since that time? If you are giving your introduction to the concept of a flat earth as the reason for these positive changes I would be very curious as to how that happened.

It isn't so much because I believe in Flat Earth.   I do not know what the shape of the Earth is.   But, I opened my mind to consider that it might be possible.   I certainly reject a lot of what we call modern science including Copernicus. 

I just started watching Flat Earth videos. Now my credit card balances are starting to go down.  Lots of other stuff, too.

Now you really have me interested! Can you please tell me how I can lower my credit card balances by opening my mind to considering that it [flat earth] might be possible?

434
He's gone dark and silent as a submarine, leavin us hangin like Apollo 13.   ???

435
Flat Earth Community / Re: What Flat Earth has done for me.
« on: October 18, 2016, 04:14:26 PM »
I am truly curious. Are you saying that all these positive changes in your life occurred as a result of being introduced to the concept of a flat earth or are you simply stating that these changes have occurred since that time? If you are giving your introduction to the concept of a flat earth as the reason for these positive changes I would be very curious as to how that happened.

436
First suggestion: I support an expedition to the ice wall. Or a flight over it.

Second suggestion: Send a camera or camera's into space - either far enough way to get a decent picture of the globe (oops, I meant earth) or if that's not possible use multiple cameras to measure the angle to the horizon in multiple directions.

Third suggestion: Redo the Bedford Level Experiments, with both REers and FErs involved, and settle, once and for all, which result was caused by refraction.

Fourth suggestion: Measure the distance around the earth along a line of latitude halfway between the equator and the North Pole and compare it to the distance around the earth along a line of latitude equidistant from the equator but south of it.

Fifth: Level some land in a straight line for a mile or two, using a laser set up at the starting point. Lay some pipe along the 'level' ground with a T in the middle pointing upwards. Pour water into the T and see if it runs both ways or only one way.

Edit: REers and FEers should be involved in any of the above, not just #3.

437
Flat Earth Media / Re: All of my working will be here
« on: October 15, 2016, 05:30:49 AM »
Saving this space for future reply. Dear God I wish I had the words right now...

There is no adequate response in Elvish, Entish, or the tongues of Men to this aberration.

438
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Apollo 8 astronaut William Ander's Earthrise???
« on: October 15, 2016, 04:44:59 AM »
Thanks Rabinoz.

These guys got one up to 17.5 miles for $150 - they claim. I think it's awesome what they did. But if I did it I would like to see if I could get higher and also have better control of the camera. I think you are right about measuring the dip to the horizon being more definitive - unless you're a FEer. I don't know if it's possible, but I would like to stream in real time to youtube (or somewhere the public can access it) and invite anyone who wants to to come watch it. If the streaming was constant from take-off to it's maximum height you would have a hard time arguing with it. Also, I would like to keep it simple and low-cost so your average person could repeat the experiment if they had any doubts. I don't know if this is possible but I would like to try. I'll think about it and see if it's something I want to do. It won't be for at least a year anyway.

Yes, but 17.5 miles above the earth sounds a lot, but it's equivalent to about 1/50" (about 0.5 mm) above the surface of a bowling ball.

In other words it's hardly got above the surface yet, a couple of hundred miles as in a satellite launch is "starting to talk".

I think I need to get up has high as possible via balloon. Then use a rockets? A camera is pretty small and light.


439
Flat Earth Community / Re: Merely mistaken
« on: October 14, 2016, 07:25:21 AM »

I was just making a pointless point.
How sharp is the point on a pointless point?

440
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Apollo 8 astronaut William Ander's Earthrise???
« on: October 14, 2016, 02:14:34 AM »


If you use a good 50 mm lens on a full frame 35 mm camera (or equivalent on smaller cameras) you will get little the distortion that so many FEers call "fish-eye lens" effect.

The sensor on a standard full frame 35 mm camera is about 36x24 mm (width x height), so the angluar field covered can be found from 2 x atan((half image dimenension)/ (lens focal length)).
For this standard 50 mm lens this makes the angular Field of View is roughly 41° x 28°.

Now how far away depends on whether you want to show the full disk or just enough of the curvature to be convincing.
If you don't show the full disk, flat earthers will try to claim "so what, that just shows the "illuminated disk caused by the sun".

So to be really sure you are seeing the globe you need to be at a distance where the whole diameter of the earth (about 12,742 km) can be seen.

A bit more trig is needed (mind you bit of simple proportion would do it too). We need to find the distance for the half angle at the camera to be under 14°.

This can be worked out from distance = (diameter/2)/sin(ang/2) or almost over 28,000 km - this is the distance from the earth centre. The altitude is about 22,000 km.

Now the geostationary weather satellites are rather bit above this at an altitude of approximately 35,786 km, giving them view of all but even at this altitude they miss almost 9° of each polar region.

As far as I am concerned any altitude above about 100 km will show good curvature, the ISS is typically at about 400 km (it varies substantially), but the images from that leave no doubt - no wonder Flat Earthers deny its existence!

But if you want (almost) the lot without using a wide angle lens you do need to be over 22,000 km. (I hope my tans and sins aren't confused, or I'll get my hide tanned for my sins!)

In my opinion, a more definitive test is to measure the dip angle from the local horizontal to the horizon. There are lots of references on the internet to this and it does not need such a high altitude to be convincing - a balloon or rocket with carefully aligned cameras could photograph the horizon in say four directions. Thid dip angle is about 3° at 10,000 m altitude and increases as the square root of the altitude above that.

The earth is huge!

Thanks Rabinoz.

These guys got one up to 17.5 miles for $150 - they claim. I think it's awesome what they did. But if I did it I would like to see if I could get higher and also have better control of the camera. I think you are right about measuring the dip to the horizon being more definitive - unless you're a FEer. I don't know if it's possible, but I would like to stream in real time to youtube (or somewhere the public can access it) and invite anyone who wants to to come watch it. If the streaming was constant from take-off to it's maximum height you would have a hard time arguing with it. Also, I would like to keep it simple and low-cost so your average person could repeat the experiment if they had any doubts. I don't know if this is possible but I would like to try. I'll think about it and see if it's something I want to do. It won't be for at least a year anyway.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24  Next >