Quote from: markjo on March 10, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: Rama Set on March 10, 2014, 07:20:00 PMProvided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.Minor nit to pick: there are only 180 degrees of latitude.So it is. But you do have to count each latitude twice to make a circumference effectively making 360 degrees to count.
Quote from: Rama Set on March 10, 2014, 07:20:00 PMProvided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.Minor nit to pick: there are only 180 degrees of latitude.
Provided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.
If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.
Quote from: Lord Dave on March 10, 2014, 06:00:10 PMQuote from: Thork on March 09, 2014, 01:34:30 PMIts simple trigonometry, Dave. London is 0 degrees West/East. It is 51 degrees north.Sydney is 151 degrees East and 33 degrees south. Each degree is 60 nautical miles. Make a triangle. angle 151 degrees. sides are (90-51) x 60) and ((90 x 60) +(33 x 60))Bit of trig later9,495 nautical miles. There is a fair bit of rounding on my part not using minutes etc but you see how its done. The round earth value is 9,174 nautical miles. Hardly impossible to make a calculator, is it?However, I don't want to generate all the answers. I'd rather the community got together and debated the calcs and the mathematics. This isn't Thork's flat earth society. If a formula is arrived at, I'm sure me or Pizzaplanet can convert this to javascript or whatever their preference is.Wouldn't the latitude and longitude lines be different on a flat earth due to the different positioning and elongation/shrinking of continents?Provided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.
Quote from: Thork on March 09, 2014, 01:34:30 PMIts simple trigonometry, Dave. London is 0 degrees West/East. It is 51 degrees north.Sydney is 151 degrees East and 33 degrees south. Each degree is 60 nautical miles. Make a triangle. angle 151 degrees. sides are (90-51) x 60) and ((90 x 60) +(33 x 60))Bit of trig later9,495 nautical miles. There is a fair bit of rounding on my part not using minutes etc but you see how its done. The round earth value is 9,174 nautical miles. Hardly impossible to make a calculator, is it?However, I don't want to generate all the answers. I'd rather the community got together and debated the calcs and the mathematics. This isn't Thork's flat earth society. If a formula is arrived at, I'm sure me or Pizzaplanet can convert this to javascript or whatever their preference is.Wouldn't the latitude and longitude lines be different on a flat earth due to the different positioning and elongation/shrinking of continents?
Its simple trigonometry, Dave. London is 0 degrees West/East. It is 51 degrees north.Sydney is 151 degrees East and 33 degrees south. Each degree is 60 nautical miles. Make a triangle. angle 151 degrees. sides are (90-51) x 60) and ((90 x 60) +(33 x 60))Bit of trig later9,495 nautical miles. There is a fair bit of rounding on my part not using minutes etc but you see how its done. The round earth value is 9,174 nautical miles. Hardly impossible to make a calculator, is it?However, I don't want to generate all the answers. I'd rather the community got together and debated the calcs and the mathematics. This isn't Thork's flat earth society. If a formula is arrived at, I'm sure me or Pizzaplanet can convert this to javascript or whatever their preference is.
That would mean revamping their associated coordinates, not the coordinate system itself.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.
Quote from: Rama Set on March 10, 2014, 11:29:15 PMQuote from: markjo on March 10, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: Rama Set on March 10, 2014, 07:20:00 PMProvided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.Minor nit to pick: there are only 180 degrees of latitude.So it is. But you do have to count each latitude twice to make a circumference effectively making 360 degrees to count.Do you mean "diameter" instead of "circumference"?
Quote from: Rama Set on March 10, 2014, 07:20:00 PMQuote from: Lord Dave on March 10, 2014, 06:00:10 PMQuote from: Thork on March 09, 2014, 01:34:30 PMIts simple trigonometry, Dave. London is 0 degrees West/East. It is 51 degrees north.Sydney is 151 degrees East and 33 degrees south. Each degree is 60 nautical miles. Make a triangle. angle 151 degrees. sides are (90-51) x 60) and ((90 x 60) +(33 x 60))Bit of trig later9,495 nautical miles. There is a fair bit of rounding on my part not using minutes etc but you see how its done. The round earth value is 9,174 nautical miles. Hardly impossible to make a calculator, is it?However, I don't want to generate all the answers. I'd rather the community got together and debated the calcs and the mathematics. This isn't Thork's flat earth society. If a formula is arrived at, I'm sure me or Pizzaplanet can convert this to javascript or whatever their preference is.Wouldn't the latitude and longitude lines be different on a flat earth due to the different positioning and elongation/shrinking of continents?Provided the Earth is a circle then they would only vary based on the diameter of the Earth since the system is defined by having 360 degrees of latitude and longitude.And how large should we make the flat earth?
Quote from: inquisitive on March 10, 2014, 10:42:52 PMPlease explain why distances must be the same on different shaped surfaces.Why would I try explaining something I didn't say or claim? That'd be a silly thing for me to do, and it's a very silly thing for you to request.
Please explain why distances must be the same on different shaped surfaces.
Quote from: pizaaplanet on March 11, 2014, 12:07:06 AMQuote from: inquisitive on March 10, 2014, 10:42:52 PMPlease explain why distances must be the same on different shaped surfaces.Why would I try explaining something I didn't say or claim? That'd be a silly thing for me to do, and it's a very silly thing for you to request.You said they would not be different, so must be the same.
You said they would not be different, so must be the same.
If we are not speculating then we must assume
Basic maths tells us that it would not be possible to put 10 capital cities of the world on a flat scale map and maintain the actual distances between each one.
Quote from: inquisitive on March 12, 2014, 08:56:16 AMBasic maths tells us that it would not be possible to put 10 capital cities of the world on a flat scale map and maintain the actual distances between each one.You're more than welcome to demonstrate that. So far, all you've contributed to this forum is a bunch of unsubstantiated claims and straw man attacks. Don't expect people to take you seriously.
Quote from: inquisitive on March 11, 2014, 11:41:20 PMYou said they would not be different, so must be the same.I did not say that. I said that your statement of "they must be different" is false.
Quote from: pizaaplanet on March 12, 2014, 09:03:27 AMQuote from: inquisitive on March 12, 2014, 08:56:16 AMBasic maths tells us that it would not be possible to put 10 capital cities of the world on a flat scale map and maintain the actual distances between each one.You're more than welcome to demonstrate that. So far, all you've contributed to this forum is a bunch of unsubstantiated claims and straw man attacks. Don't expect people to take you seriously.It is not an attack, how can all the distances between 5 places remain the same on a flat surface and a spherical one?
Sorry mate, but this is still just a claim. Can you do the transformation you are talking about?
Quote from: Rama Set on March 12, 2014, 01:11:39 PMSorry mate, but this is still just a claim. Can you do the transformation you are talking about?What's not to understand?
What 'transformation'?
Please provide a link to a flat earth map.
Quote from: inquisitive on March 12, 2014, 01:17:14 PMQuote from: Rama Set on March 12, 2014, 01:11:39 PMSorry mate, but this is still just a claim. Can you do the transformation you are talking about?What's not to understand?The point is that you are responsible for making people understand your claims.QuoteWhat 'transformation'?You are talking about transforming a set of coordinates from a flat space to a curved space.QuotePlease provide a link to a flat earth map. Huh? Aside from being a REer and understanding that they have never claimed to have an accurate map, why would I do that?
Quote from: Rama Set on March 12, 2014, 01:42:46 PMQuote from: inquisitive on March 12, 2014, 01:17:14 PMQuote from: Rama Set on March 12, 2014, 01:11:39 PMSorry mate, but this is still just a claim. Can you do the transformation you are talking about?What's not to understand?The point is that you are responsible for making people understand your claims.QuoteWhat 'transformation'?You are talking about transforming a set of coordinates from a flat space to a curved space.QuotePlease provide a link to a flat earth map. Huh? Aside from being a REer and understanding that they have never claimed to have an accurate map, why would I do that?If there was a flat earth map then distances could be measured and compared with verified ones on a spherical earth. Obviously they would be different.
Or is that too much to hope for from the management?
Perhaps if you were to reply with meaningful responses, rather than with vague, one word answers, then there might not be so much confusion and the discussion could proceed in a productive manner.