41

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Theory that Black Holes are Land Mass

« on: July 29, 2022, 02:56:31 AM »

You begin by making a calculated guess based on a mathematical model, then compare that to experiment.  If the result of the experiment does not support your calculations, they get thrown out and you begin again.  That is how the process (simplified) of science works.  That process is not what I see here.  You might actually enjoy that video.

This disproves much of your astronomical theories. The physics of galaxies and the three body problem do not work -

https://wiki.tfes.org/Problems_of_the_Galaxies#Galactic_Epicycles

https://wiki.tfes.org/Three_Body_Problem

We've been through this before Tom.

The three (or more) body problem is one of finding a analytic solution to the system of differential equations.  It has nothing to do with the physics.  You have always been unable to differentiate between using numerical methods to find an analytic solution and running a numerical simulation.  Numerical simulations prove the physics and can be used to predict reality to arbitrary precision.

As I said we have been trough this before.   Others have had this dance with you too.  Your unwillingness to educate yourself leaves you ignorant, stupid and constantly getting this wrong.  I don't want or need to go here with you again.

Indeed.  The theory here is general relativity and it has been verified by gravity probe B which directly measured the curvature, in addition to our being able to predict how the path of bodies moving through space will be impacted.

42

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Theory that Black Holes are Land Mass

« on: July 28, 2022, 10:50:13 PM »

I'll try to answer a few of your questions sincerely.

I honestly think over time as observations become better along with telescopes like the James Webb, then we will see our orbit and position around the Milky Way is similar to Dwarf Galaxies.

You accept that the JWST is real, is making observations of the cosmos and was launched from earth into space.  But everything about that process like all space launches was calculated on the standard (RE) model of the solar system which you claim is completely and radical wrong.   If JWST is real then the earth is round.  You can't have it both ways.

43

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question about EA wiki page leading to a fundamental question

« on: July 28, 2022, 05:40:23 PM »

I do feel there's a problem with close-mindedness or group think perhaps that's preventing and even strangling the progress of science and new people with new faces.

Science is producing new results faster then ever.  NASA generates somewhere around 12TB of data per day to add to their 24PB collection.   Roughly a third of that daily torrent is earth science data .  The James Webb Space Telescope will certainly produce many new discoveries and result in both answers and new questions.  New scientists join this great quest for knowledge all the time.  The joy and excitement from both young and old on the JWST project shown on the various videos as the first images were received was positively infectious.  Other areas of research are producing amazing things as well (at the opposite end of the size scale CERN is having a bit of a renaissance).  Upsetting the status-quo is difficult, but it happens all the time by doing good science.

44

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 27, 2022, 04:13:42 PM »

The emails between folks in the Trump campaign clearly use the term when describing their scheme.

from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/26/us/politics/trump-fake-electors-emails.html
“We would just be sending in ‘fake’ electoral votes to Pence so that ‘someone’ in Congress can make an objection when they start counting votes, and start arguing that the ‘fake’ votes should be counted,” Jack Wilenchik, a Phoenix-based lawyer who helped organize the pro-Trump electors in Arizona, wrote in a Dec. 8, 2020, email to Boris Epshteyn, a strategic adviser for the Trump campaign.

45

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Theory that Black Holes are Land Mass

« on: July 27, 2022, 08:49:23 AM »

The grand theory will see similarities between observations we see on earth with those in neighboring galaxies.

Again you seem to accept the existence of galaxies but not that our sun is just one star of the 100s of billions in the Milky Way galaxy and that even nearby galaxies are vastly far away.  That is what observations tell us.

     I'm aware that we locate black holes by the orbiting bodies around it.  I'm not sure if they are orbiting the black hole or its accompanying solar system.

Its possible that planets could be orbiting black holes, but even if so the mass of a bunch of planets would be nothing compared to that of a black hole and the observed orbits of the stars require a giant mass.

  And below is a short clip of the northern lights.  Heated gas goes into and out of view:  Northern Lights clip:  https://player.vimeo.com/video/45819280?h=bfb07b50a6

Northern lights are an entirely different phenomenon and produce entirely different radiation than gas being massively heated as it falls into a black hole.  The first images of the event horizon were captures by radio telescopes as well as the Chandra X-Ray telescope.  What you see are false color images of that data where as the aurora borealis are of course visible light.

46

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Theory that Black Holes are Land Mass

« on: July 27, 2022, 07:26:10 AM »

I suppose the most compelling reasons for me are observational data.

But as Stack points out, your proposal does not remotely correspond to observation.   You seem to accept the existence of galaxies of stars but not the characteristics and/or relationships of those objects.   Dreaming or brain doodling or whatever you want to call it can be entertaining but when you say that your are working on a theory that sounds like you view it as more than that.  Care to elaborate?

Note the evidence for black holes is the path of stars orbiting what seems an empty spot in space, from which we can estimate the mass of that unseen object and its so huge it must be a black hole.  As well as the observation of an event horizon where gas pulled into a black hole is heated and glows but then disappears.  Only black holes, as far as we know, produce this effect.

47

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Correlation between FEers and belief that the 2020 election was stolen?

« on: July 26, 2022, 08:04:10 PM »

Which 2020 election?

OH, since I mentioned "stolen from Trump" I presumed folks would take it as the 2020 US Presidential Election.   I added an line of explanation.

48

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Correlation between FEers and belief the US 2020 election for POTUS was stolen?

« on: July 26, 2022, 07:37:52 PM »

Ideally I would also ask about the political leaning of those that respond but that made for way to many options.

49

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 26, 2022, 05:21:02 PM »

Since he could have brought them there in minutes with a simple phone call, but did not do so, clearly he did NOT want them there.

Wait...you were just saying how the president is in charge...

How did the National Guard get there if the President didn't want them there?

Trump only let the National Guard show up after his insurrection failed.  During the time it had a shot at succeeding he was happy to do nothing and see what happens.

Oops sorry I missed your reply Action80, but crutonius said what I would have said.

50

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 26, 2022, 04:05:30 PM »

If everyone was evacuated then there was no risk to life by letting them go inside the building.

Everyone had NOT been evacuated when the protesters broke in.  The secret service guarding Pence was clearly in fear for their lives.

Many people have died through trampling, and is a reason for why one should not shout "fire" in a crowded theater.

Isn't shouting fire exactly what Trump did when he told the mob to go down to the capital and "We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore."?

51

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2022, 08:46:33 PM »

Incorrect. Trump wanted the National Guard there ...

Since he could have brought them there in minutes with a simple phone call, but did not do so, clearly he did NOT want them there.

and ultimately delegated the use of the National Guard to the Defense Secretary

All modern presidents including Trump have delegated deployment of the DC national guard to the Secretary of Defense who delegates it to the Secretary of the Army, this is standard procedure and has nothing to do with this particular event.  The President is still at the top of the command tree and could have ordered the guard in at any time, like as soon as the first barricade was overrun especially since he knew the mob was armed sufficiently to not be able to get through metal detectors.

The protestors ended up taking a tour of of a largely empty Capitol building ...

If it was just "a tour" why was congress evacuated?  Why was Pence's security detail calling their families and telling them that they loved them clearly thinking that they might die in the next few minutes?

52

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question about EA wiki page leading to a fundamental question

« on: July 25, 2022, 05:08:52 PM »

Billo, this forum is a good place to start.

Making wild claims that do not come close to standing up under scrutiny is not science.

53

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2022, 05:03:06 PM »

It was not Trump's responsibility to approve usage of the the National Guard. The approval was already given and delegated in days prior. Trump had already delegated deployment of the guard to the Defense Secretary -

All modern presidents (since WWII) have delegated NG deployment decisions to the Secretary of Defense who delegates it to the Secretary of the Army.  Note that they are under command of the President.  For a state this responsibility goes to the Governor, but DC is not a state so the President plays this role.  Trump is watching the whole thing first in person then from the Whitehouse (live on TV).  As soon as the crowed pushed over the first barrier at the bottom of the Capital steps he could have picked up the phone and called the Secretary of the Army and said "I want a thousand NG troops outside the Capital now", and they likely would have been there in 10 minutes.  There would have been no discussion about optics as it would be a direct order from the President not a request from the Mayor or the Chief of the Capital police etc.

But he did not do so. It seems quite clear that he wanted the constitutionally mandated process interrupted by the mob.

54

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question about EA wiki page leading to a fundamental question

« on: July 25, 2022, 07:42:02 AM »

I think Flat Earth Theory has made alot of progress over the past few years.   Lets just keep talking science and let what happens happen.

I am tempted to conclude from this that you consider science a good means of determining the nature of reality.    Yet baring the "brains in jars" notion, science tells us with certainty that the earth is round.  Its not like say multiverse theory that has its supporters and detractors.  There are no papers in scientific journals making the case that the earth is flat.  So your statement seems puzzling.

55

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 25, 2022, 07:33:10 AM »

You are quoting things that Miller said in that passage, not Trump. Trump wanted sufficient numbers of National Guard and Soldiers at the protest.

Trump could at any time have picked up the phone and ordered the guard out to anywhere in DC.  He did not do so.