#### Pattu

• 1
##### Explanation for South pole?
« on: December 08, 2014, 05:41:05 PM »
I just heard about Theory t'day (via VSauce) and the only thing in my head which didn't get a satisfying anwer was the problem with southern hemisphere and especially antarctica.

So there where basically 2 questions:
First of all the problem with SH.
I asked myself why flying from Southern Argentinia to South Africa takes the time RET suggests.
Second:
Why cant we go past the Ice Wall or why dont we fall off after passing it.

So in my (17yo) head I formed some theories:

There is a 4th dimension (really in space, like a direction, i dont mean time) and the earth spins around itself in this dimension.
Imagine a 2-dimensional beeing which gets taken "outside" of its dimension, turned 180° in 3rd dimension and gets out back inside its 2 dim. world. From its point of view left and right eg. changed. Turned by 90° every 2d object would get a line.
So why shouldnt our earth also get turned in 4th dimension without that we notice it bc our brain can only think 3dimensionally?
So this could mean antarctica is a circle in our brain but due the 4dimensional turning of our earth it is actually a point because 4dimensionality can turn circles into points somehow as 3dimensionality can turn circles into lines?
Imo its logical that when 3d can turn objects 1d down, 4d can turn them 2 down.
So assuming that we are 3d thinking beeings in a 4d world we could copy this to 2d thinking beeings in a 3d world like beeings living on a sphere eg a cylinder. Like they move only flat on the surface wihtout going into height.
To them distance from left to right (so opposite sites of the surface area) is kind of C-shaped like going around on the surface bc they cant move off or thru the surface. But in 3d reality the real distance is I-shaped, so just going straight thru the middle of the cylinder.
But going from the bottom edge to the point on the top egde right above (practically the height) would be the same distance in 2d and 3d. So distances can actually changes when switching to another dimension.
So in this theory it could also be possible that the distance we on earth go up with 9.81m/s/s is not actually the same as people on a disk 100km over earth but it SEEMS to be the same distance in 3d. This could explain why there is less gravitation in higher spheres: they move slower, so they pass less distance in 4d but it seems to be the same in 3d so the distance between us and higher spheres still looks constant for us.

Let me know whether some parts of that might be useful or wheter my brain was just creating some bull****.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2014, 06:03:10 PM by Pattu »

#### Tintagel

• 531
• Full of Tinier Tintagels
##### Re: Explanation for South pole?
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2014, 08:11:55 PM »
I just heard about Theory t'day (via VSauce) and the only thing in my head which didn't get a satisfying anwer was the problem with southern hemisphere and especially antarctica.

So there where basically 2 questions:
First of all the problem with SH.
I asked myself why flying from Southern Argentinia to South Africa takes the time RET suggests.
Second:
Why cant we go past the Ice Wall or why dont we fall off after passing it.

So in my (17yo) head I formed some theories:

There is a 4th dimension (really in space, like a direction, i dont mean time) and the earth spins around itself in this dimension.
Imagine a 2-dimensional beeing which gets taken "outside" of its dimension, turned 180° in 3rd dimension and gets out back inside its 2 dim. world. From its point of view left and right eg. changed. Turned by 90° every 2d object would get a line.
So why shouldnt our earth also get turned in 4th dimension without that we notice it bc our brain can only think 3dimensionally?
So this could mean antarctica is a circle in our brain but due the 4dimensional turning of our earth it is actually a point because 4dimensionality can turn circles into points somehow as 3dimensionality can turn circles into lines?
Imo its logical that when 3d can turn objects 1d down, 4d can turn them 2 down.
So assuming that we are 3d thinking beeings in a 4d world we could copy this to 2d thinking beeings in a 3d world like beeings living on a sphere eg a cylinder. Like they move only flat on the surface wihtout going into height.
To them distance from left to right (so opposite sites of the surface area) is kind of C-shaped like going around on the surface bc they cant move off or thru the surface. But in 3d reality the real distance is I-shaped, so just going straight thru the middle of the cylinder.
But going from the bottom edge to the point on the top egde right above (practically the height) would be the same distance in 2d and 3d. So distances can actually changes when switching to another dimension.
So in this theory it could also be possible that the distance we on earth go up with 9.81m/s/s is not actually the same as people on a disk 100km over earth but it SEEMS to be the same distance in 3d. This could explain why there is less gravitation in higher spheres: they move slower, so they pass less distance in 4d but it seems to be the same in 3d so the distance between us and higher spheres still looks constant for us.

Let me know whether some parts of that might be useful or wheter my brain was just creating some bull****.

Hi there, and welcome to TFES

I think I see where you're going with this but I suspect you may be overcomplicating things.  You'll find that most of our members tend to eschew ideas like extra dimensions and rely upon observable phenomena.  I've been known to venture into the theoretical from time to time, but the foundation of Flat Earth Theory is and has always been zetetic philosophy.  Focus on what you know - what you *really* know - and you'll be surprised how little it is.

Also, there are flat earth models that don't include an ice wall or south pole that surrounds us.  Some do render antarctica as a distinct continent.

Looking forward to future interactions!