[edby]

I gave 3 examples of maps WIDELY accepted maps of the earth that I consider largely accurate. They all display NOTHING about the shape of the earth. They all depict the earth as an infinite repeating plane.

(1) Google maps tells you the correct distance between different points.
(2) Therefore it tells you SOMETHING about the shape of the earth.

Gauss's proposition, which is the basis of all geodesy, is that you can tell the shape of the earth just by measuring the distances between a set of points. A big tape measure is enough. If you disagree, explain why.

[iamcpc]

I gave 3 examples of maps WIDELY accepted maps of the earth that I consider largely accurate. They all display NOTHING about the shape of the earth. They all depict the earth as an infinite repeating plane.

(1) Google maps tells you the correct distance between different points.
(2) Therefore it tells you SOMETHING about the shape of the earth.

Gauss's proposition, which is the basis of all geodesy, is that you can tell the shape of the earth just by measuring the distances between a set of points. A big tape measure is enough. If you disagree, explain why.

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea. I asked my friend the math major and he didn't have any insight. I have no reason to either agree or disagree.

Logically if you told me the distance between point A and B was 500 miles and the distance between point C and D was also 500 miles and then asked me what shape the object is that these points are located on i would say that you don't have enough information to calculate the shape of the object. Maybe if I had some sort of direction or layout of these points I could take a shot at it.

furthermore I believe it's highly possible there is some sort of difference between a distance between points in planar geometry and on earth. Planar geometry generally does have hills, lakes, trees, etc. But don't take my word for it. I don't have a masters in math. If you do then you surely know much more about it than I do.


I don't want to derail this conversation with complex math (which any FE person can easily claim is a product of a sphere earth system therefore will show the earth is a sphere) and the shape of the earth.
I would like to, instead, discuss how it's possible in the flat earth theory that these distances which have been traveled, measured, navigated, and verified hundreds of thousands of times are still claimed to be unknown.

[edby]

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea. I asked my friend the math major and he didn't have any insight. I have no reason to either agree or disagree.

But if you don't understand the math, why are you making a claim that contradicts the math? The whole basis of geodesy is to determine the shape of the earth by using large tape measures. You may dispute this, but then it's odd to say you don't understand the claim you dispute.

This brings us to the 1827 paper Disquisitiones generales circa superficies curvas in which Gauss thought to ask not only how the shape of the earth might affect the geodetic measurements taken during the survey and how those measurements are interpreted, but the reverse question of what the measurements themselves would imply about the shape of the earth. The answer to this reverse question would be useful, for instance, if we lived on a cloud covered planet and could not get clues about the shape of our planet from lunar eclipses and the like.

What Gauss discovered was that one could, in fact, determine the shape of the earth, or of any surface for that matter, just by looking at certain geodetic measurements. In particular, Gauss was interested in the sum of the angles of a triangle whose sides were all segments of shortest paths on the surface, like arcs of great circles on a sphere. Gauss noticed that on many curved surfaces, including spheres, the sum of the angles would be more or less than 180°. For angle sums in excess of 180°, Gauss described the surface as having ‘positive’ curvature, while ‘negative’ curvature corresponded to angle sums of less than 180°. He introduced the concept of what we now call the Gaussian curvature of a surface at a given point, and, in the famous theorema egregium (literally, “the outstanding theorem”), proved that two areas can be mapped isometrically onto each other (that is, the map has a single fixed scale factor of 1) only if the Gaussian curvatures are identical at corresponding points of the two areas.

Timothy G. Feeman, Portraits of the Earth: A Mathematician Looks at Maps, American Mathematical Society 2000. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=j1SFbvybvugC&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37

Presumably your math friend has heard of Gauss?

[iamcpc]

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea. I asked my friend the math major and he didn't have any insight. I have no reason to either agree or disagree.

But if you don't understand the math, why are you making a claim that contradicts the math? The whole basis of geodesy is to determine the shape of the earth by using large tape measures. You may dispute this, but then it's odd to say you don't understand the claim you dispute.

My claim was that the only flat earth model that I've found which can corroborate these things is one of an infinite repeating plane. Is that claim somehow against some math I don't understand? If so can you dumb it down to calc 2 level math for me and explain how my claim contradicts it?

Presumably your math friend has heard of Gauss?

I don't want to derail this conversation with complex math (which any FE person can easily claim is a product of a sphere earth system therefore will show the earth is a sphere) and the shape of the earth.
I would like to, instead, discuss how it's possible in the flat earth theory that these distances which have been traveled, measured, navigated, and verified hundreds of thousands of times are still claimed to be unknown.

If you are looking to debate masters level math with someone you should start a new thread which I will gladly avoid because I don't have a masters in math. I will concede defeat right now and say that you have mathematically PROVEN beyond ANY doubt that the earth is an oblate spheroid. Can we get back on the topic now?

[edby]

Take the four points of a pyramid, plus its apex. Measure the 8 distances involved. You can represent these on a flat map, however it will be impossible to draw them to scale.

My claim was that the only flat earth model that I've found which can corroborate these things is one of an infinite repeating plane. Is that claim somehow against some math I don't understand?

Yes.

I don't want to derail this conversation with complex math (which any FE person can easily claim is a product of a sphere earth system therefore will show the earth is a sphere) and the shape of the earth.

FE people will typically dispute the distances, rather than the math, knowing they will be unlikely to dispute the math.

And no, the measurement of the distance using tape measure techniques does not depend on a 'sphere earth system'. That's the whole point of geodesy.

[AATW]

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea.

I've no idea either and it's beyond my level of maths, but while I might not be able to calculate the shape from the distances, what I could do is try and plot those distances on a flat piece of paper. If I discover I can't then I must conclude that the earth cannot be flat, or the distances are wrong.
And since the distances are well established and are used by the global transport industry to reliably get goods and people around, it's a bit of a stretch to claim that they don't know how far they're travelling or the speed of their craft. You'd think knowing those things would be pretty crucial to their business model.

[edby]

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea.

I've no idea either and it's beyond my level of maths, but while I might not be able to calculate the shape from the distances, what I could do is try and plot those distances on a flat piece of paper. If I discover I can't then I must conclude that the earth cannot be flat, or the distances are wrong.
And since the distances are well established and are used by the global transport industry to reliably get goods and people around, it's a bit of a stretch to claim that they don't know how far they're travelling or the speed of their craft. You'd think knowing those things would be pretty crucial to their business model.

A simple way to visualise this is the tetrahedron



You can see it is made up of 4 triangles, but a triangle is absolutely rigid, so there is no way of putting the tetrahedron back together again on a flat surface.

So if you measured the sides of the tetrahedron, you could immediately conclude what 3 dimensional shape it had.

[iamcpc]

A simple way to visualise this is the tetrahedron



You can see it is made up of 4 triangles, but a triangle is absolutely rigid, so there is no way of putting the tetrahedron back together again on a flat surface.

So if you measured the sides of the tetrahedron, you could immediately conclude what 3 dimensional shape it had.

1. I could draw something within the boundaries of that pyramid which hits all 4 points of that pyramid, yet is not shaped like a pyramid.
2. What does this have to do with how it's widely accepted in the flat earth theory that distances which have been traveled, measured, navigated, and verified hundreds of thousands of times are still claimed to be unknown.
3. I took Geometry in high school. I took algebra and Calc1 to Calc2 in College. Even beyond Calc I took some higher level statistics classes. I never took any classes about 3d planar geometry.

[Curiosity File]

I thought I just explained my level of math. Personally if you looked at points on a basketball and told me the distance between several I would be unable to calculate the shape of the basketball. Is it possible to do? I have no idea. I asked my friend the math major and he didn't have any insight. I have no reason to either agree or disagree.

But if you don't understand the math, why are you making a claim that contradicts the math? The whole basis of geodesy is to determine the shape of the earth by using large tape measures. You may dispute this, but then it's odd to say you don't understand the claim you dispute.

My claim was that the only flat earth model that I've found which can corroborate these things is one of an infinite repeating plane. Is that claim somehow against some math I don't understand? If so can you dumb it down to calc 2 level math for me and explain how my claim contradicts it?

Presumably your math friend has heard of Gauss?

I don't want to derail this conversation with complex math (which any FE person can easily claim is a product of a sphere earth system therefore will show the earth is a sphere) and the shape of the earth.
I would like to, instead, discuss how it's possible in the flat earth theory that these distances which have been traveled, measured, navigated, and verified hundreds of thousands of times are still claimed to be unknown.

If you are looking to debate masters level math with someone you should start a new thread which I will gladly avoid because I don't have a masters in math. I will concede defeat right now and say that you have mathematically PROVEN beyond ANY doubt that the earth is an oblate spheroid. Can we get back on the topic now?

I don't mind threads going off topic a bit because it usually bring more information and more information means more learning.
But I have to agree this level of math is beyond most and I'd bet beyond anybody on this forum including the guy posting it.
Honestly it doesn't take anything more than grade school level arithmetic to calculate distances, rate of speed over time etc. It's a little more complicated to calculate how to leave point A and arrive at point B without missing the target, but not much.

But honestly the reason I started this thread wasn't to calculate the distance from Chile to Australia. At some point I wanted to have FET show their calculate distance from one edge of the earth to the other using Chile and Australia as starting reference points seeing as how FET has Chile and Australia on opposite ends of the flat earth. I figured from the west coast of Chile to the west edge of the 'flat earth' is is very close and like wise for the east cost of Australia to the other edge. But obviously this was futile because FET doesn't even seem to be able to calculate how far Chile is from Australia without using RE model mapping, tech and equipment.
I guess it will be forever a mystery the over all dimensions of flat earth. Until they can come up with some kind of solid theory which allows them to develop correct math equations,( based on FET), which would allow them to develop equipment that would allow them to navigate, communicate and accurately measure the "FLAT EARTH". Which would render ALL RE tech and equipment obsolete and they would make a fortune.
Until then we can be sure FET is way off.             

[iamcpc]

I don't mind threads going off topic a bit because it usually bring more information and more information means more learning.
But I have to agree this level of math is beyond most and I'd bet beyond anybody on this forum including the guy posting it.
Honestly it doesn't take anything more than grade school level arithmetic to calculate distances, rate of speed over time etc. It's a little more complicated to calculate how to leave point A and arrive at point B without missing the target, but not not much.

I agree 10000000000%

But honestly the reason I started this thread wasn't to calculate the distance from Chile to Australia. At some point I wanted to have FET show their calculate distance from one edge of the earth to the other using Chile and Australia as starting reference points seeing as how FET has Chile and Australia on opposite ends of the flat earth. I figured from the west coast of Chile to the west edge of the flat is is very close and like wise for the east cost of Australia. But Obviously this futile because FET doesn't even seem to be able to calculate how far Chile is from Australia without using RE model mapping, tech and equipment.
I guess it will be forever a mystery the over all dimensions of flat earth. Until they can come up with some kind of solid theory which allows them to develop correct math equations which would allow them to develop equipment that would allow them to navigate, communicate and accurately measure the "FLAT EARTH". Which would render ALL RE tech and equipment obsolete and they would make a fortune.
Until then we can be sure FET is way off.           

The short answer is:
It's widely accepted:
1. We have no idea what the map of the earth looks like
2. Long distance measurement systems are inaccurate or wrong because they were developed or utilize round earth systems.
3. Long distances are completely unknown.
4. Since we have no idea what the map of the earth looks like we have no idea if Chile is near the edge or not.
5. There are flat earth models, such as the one I most relate to which is highly unpopular, in which the earth does not have an edge.


In the flat earth model that makes the most sense to me Chile is about 12,000 to 13,000 KM away from Australia

[Curiosity File]

I don't mind threads going off topic a bit because it usually bring more information and more information means more learning.
But I have to agree this level of math is beyond most and I'd bet beyond anybody on this forum including the guy posting it.
Honestly it doesn't take anything more than grade school level arithmetic to calculate distances, rate of speed over time etc. It's a little more complicated to calculate how to leave point A and arrive at point B without missing the target, but not not much.

I agree 10000000000%

But honestly the reason I started this thread wasn't to calculate the distance from Chile to Australia. At some point I wanted to have FET show their calculate distance from one edge of the earth to the other using Chile and Australia as starting reference points seeing as how FET has Chile and Australia on opposite ends of the flat earth. I figured from the west coast of Chile to the west edge of the flat is is very close and like wise for the east cost of Australia. But Obviously this futile because FET doesn't even seem to be able to calculate how far Chile is from Australia without using RE model mapping, tech and equipment.
I guess it will be forever a mystery the over all dimensions of flat earth. Until they can come up with some kind of solid theory which allows them to develop correct math equations which would allow them to develop equipment that would allow them to navigate, communicate and accurately measure the "FLAT EARTH". Which would render ALL RE tech and equipment obsolete and they would make a fortune.
Until then we can be sure FET is way off.           

The short answer is:
It's widely accepted:
1. We have no idea what the map of the earth looks like
2. Long distance measurement systems are inaccurate or wrong because they were developed or utilize round earth systems.
3. Long distances are completely unknown.
4. Since we have no idea what the map of the earth looks like we have no idea if Chile is near the edge or not.
5. There are flat earth models, such as the one I most relate to which is highly unpopular, in which the earth does not have an edge.


In the flat earth model that makes the most sense to me Chile is about 12,000 to 13,000 miles away from Australia

I don't think there's an air bus on the planet that could make that trip non stop? I think 10,000 mils max?

[Tom Bishop]

Although I usually don't promote the Monopole model, this question is answered by the wider Flat Earth community in the traditional FE model.

The Southern Hemisphere appears to be special place which has much stronger winds than the Northern Hemisphere:

Flights over the Southern Oceans

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2001-2005/issue-4-spring-2002/feature2/what-is-the-southern-ocean

  “ The Southern Ocean is notorious for having some of the strongest winds and largest waves on the planet. ”

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151009-where-is-the-windiest-place-on-earth

  “ There are huge belts of wind caused by the uneven way the Sun heats the Earth's surface. 30° north and south of the equator, the trade winds blow steadily. At 40° lie the prevailing westerlies, and the polar easterlies begin at around 60°.

Ask any round-the-world sailor and they will quickly tell you the stormiest seas, stirred by the strongest winds, are found in the Southern Ocean. These infamously rough latitudes are labelled the "roaring 40s", "furious 50s" and "screaming 60s". ”

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2003JD004179

  “ The Southern Ocean is a vital element in the global climate. Its circumpolar current plays a crucial role in the global transport of mass, heat, momentum, and climate signals from one ocean basin to another. Moreover, the Southern Ocean hosts the strongest surface winds of any open ocean area, fostering strong heat, moisture, and momentum exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. However, the Southern Ocean is tremendously undersurveyed by traditional observation methods because of the remoteness of the area and rough environment, causing the largest data gap of global oceans. ”

Jeran shows that the winds and Jet Streams in the Southern Hemisphere are stronger than the Northern hemisphere:

Flat Earth - Ending Southern Hemisphere Objections (Runtime: 2m)



Further, there are both Eastwards and Westwardly traveling currents in the Southern Hemisphere:

South Pacific Gyre

http://thejunkwave.com/what-is-a-gyre/



Jet Streams Enable Faster Than Sound Flight

https://www.wired.com/story/norwegian-air-transatlantic-speed-record/

  “ OK, about that "subsonic" bit. You might know that the speed of sound at an altitude of 30,000 to 40,000 feet is roughly 670 mph. But Norwegian’s planes didn't break the sound barrier. Those near-800-mph figures represent ground speed—how fast the aircraft is moving over land. Their air speed, which factors out the 200-mph wind boost, was closer to the 787's standard Mach 0.85. (The older Boeing 747 can cruise at Mach 0.86, but is less efficient than its younger stablemate.) When talking supersonic, and breaking sound barriers, it's all about the speed of the air passing over the wings, which in this case was more like 570 mph. ”

[Curiosity File]

Although I usually don't promote the Monopole model, this question is actually already answered by the wider Flat Earth community in the traditional FE model.

The Southern Hemisphere appears to be special place which has much stronger winds than the Northern Hemisphere:

Flights over the Southern Oceans

http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2001-2005/issue-4-spring-2002/feature2/what-is-the-southern-ocean

  “ The Southern Ocean is notorious for having some of the strongest winds and largest waves on the planet. ”

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151009-where-is-the-windiest-place-on-earth

  “ There are huge belts of wind caused by the uneven way the Sun heats the Earth's surface. 30° north and south of the equator, the trade winds blow steadily. At 40° lie the prevailing westerlies, and the polar easterlies begin at around 60°.

Ask any round-the-world sailor and they will quickly tell you the stormiest seas, stirred by the strongest winds, are found in the Southern Ocean. These infamously rough latitudes are labelled the "roaring 40s", "furious 50s" and "screaming 60s". ”

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2003JD004179

  “ The Southern Ocean is a vital element in the global climate. Its circumpolar current plays a crucial role in the global transport of mass, heat, momentum, and climate signals from one ocean basin to another. Moreover, the Southern Ocean hosts the strongest surface winds of any open ocean area, fostering strong heat, moisture, and momentum exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. However, the Southern Ocean is tremendously undersurveyed by traditional observation methods because of the remoteness of the area and rough environment, causing the largest data gap of global oceans. ”

Jeran shows that the winds and Jet Streams in the Southern Hemisphere are stronger than the Northern hemisphere:

Flat Earth - Ending Southern Hemisphere Objections (Runtime: 2m)



Further, there are both Eastwards and Westwardly traveling currents in the Southern Hemisphere:

South Pacific Gyre

http://thejunkwave.com/what-is-a-gyre/

There's nothing here that calculates distances and every link you posted is RE based information.
Geezus Tom I think you posted this on the wrong thread. We're trying to calculate distances.

[Tom Bishop]

All of those speeds and distances are based on RE assumptions and the RE coordinate system.

If you want someone to go out and take a tape measurer to the route, that kind of investigative work is not possible at this time.

[Curiosity File]

All of those speeds and distances are based on RE assumptions and the RE coordinate system.

If you want someone to go out and take a tape measurer to the route, that kind of investigative work is not possible at this time.

Stating the obvious doesn't work for me Tom. Also the subject here was intended for FET to give some distances and what they use to calculate these distances.
What you posted was all weather phenomena, ocean currents, temperatures and prevailing winds which my influence choice path and speeds you travel but in now way changes the distance from point A to point B.     

[iamcpc]

I don't think there's an air bus on the planet that could make that trip non stop? I think 10,000 mils max?

Sorry I typed miles instead of KM. 10,000 - 13,000 KM between Chile and Australia

[iamcpc]

All of those speeds and distances are based on RE assumptions and the RE coordinate system.

If you want someone to go out and take a tape measurer to the route, that kind of investigative work is not possible at this time.

Stating the obvious doesn't work for me Tom. Also the subject here was intended for FET to give some distances and what they use to calculate these distances.
What you posted was all weather phenomena, ocean currents, temperatures and prevailing winds which my influence choice path and speeds you travel but in now way changes the distance from point A to point B.   

Tom has pointed out, many times, even on links that I have given in this thread that these distances are not known. In his flat earth model The "known" distances are created by round earth systems thus will give a round earth result. There is no funded flat earth distance project to create a flat earth measurement system and then measure these vast distances.

[Curiosity File]

One thing that seems common place among FET is to throw in a plethora of complicated garbble, mostly irrelevant to the subject,  that takes an extremely high level of education to understand. I guess this is an attempt to confuse people in hopes that they will think, "wow he must be really smart so therefor he must be right".
Unfortunately for FET most people on this forum are educated, highly intelligent, have gone out into the real and gained experiences of their and can see this is nothing less than the antics of a "con man". My 6th grade nephew once told me that calculating distances is easy. Also the distance from Santiago to Sydney is well know. A 6th grader. Yet Flat Earthers can't do it without using RE technology. go figure.
Just one more mind boggling thing about FET believers.         

[Curiosity File]

All of those speeds and distances are based on RE assumptions and the RE coordinate system.

If you want someone to go out and take a tape measurer to the route, that kind of investigative work is not possible at this time.

Stating the obvious doesn't work for me Tom. Also the subject here was intended for FET to give some distances and what they use to calculate these distances.
What you posted was all weather phenomena, ocean currents, temperatures and prevailing winds which my influence choice path and speeds you travel but in now way changes the distance from point A to point B.   

Tom has pointed out, many times, even on links that I have given in this thread that these distances are not known. In his flat earth model The "known" distances are created by round earth systems thus will give a round earth result. There is no funded flat earth distance project to create a flat earth measurement system and then measure these vast distances.

I guess that answers my original line of questions. Thanks

[inquisitive]

All of those speeds and distances are based on RE assumptions and the RE coordinate system.

If you want someone to go out and take a tape measurer to the route, that kind of investigative work is not possible at this time.

How would you measure distances?