1

Flat Earth Projects / Attempting to actually measure gravity

« on: March 06, 2019, 02:25:07 AM »

So since my previous experiment, while apparently detecting gravity type forces, did not yield a meaningful measurement of those forces:
It was close enough to the value of gravity that my rinky dink experiment may have caused that much error, but far enough that it wasn't even close.

So I've begun efforts to actually measure it. I'm intending to get a measurement accurate enough to either match theoretical gravity, or rule it out.

My setup is a roughly 70 gram tungsten weight suspended from two strings with a small fragment of mirror attached. The weight is hanging in water to slow down the swinging.

Then a laser interferometer setup bounces 532nm laser light off the mirror on the weight and the fixed reference mirror and the combined beams hit some white paper to form an interference pattern.

Theoretically, I will be able to measure movement of the weight in increments of half of 532nm since moving the weight 1nm increases the distance by 2nm.

And depending on how far the interference bands move I may be able to even guesstimate to the nearest quarter of 532nm.


It's still taking forever to settle.

Shown first  is a test setup with a red laser.
Second, I'm showing it actually set up and "operating" with green laser, except it's still swinging too much, but the interference pattern shows up briefly at each end of the swing as the velocity briefly hits zero.
Sorry about the poor focus, my phone does not like focusing on green laser light. It's probably looking for face colors to focus on, and green is not that.
Third is showing the interference patterns as the weight still swings after an hour (while swinging in a cup of water.)

(The interference pattern is actually still there, but moving so fast it's a blur)

I could actually set up a pair of photo diodes at 90 degrees phase difference and track the quadrature and measure the swinging in realtime, but that's too much work to do before going out to dinner with friends.

Looks like this thing may never settle down completely, and even if it does, when I walk around to move the big weight nearby, the floor moves and the pattern goes crazy.
I guess 532nm isn't a very big distance.

2

Flat Earth Theory / Bob and Jeran's responses to the Behind the Curve documentary

« on: March 04, 2019, 09:16:51 PM »

Bob and Jeran's responses to the Behind the Curve documentary may be found here:



In regards to the gyroscope, Bob says that he has never actually touched the device himself and gives us some more details about the event.

Jeran's response starts at the 14:20 mark. Jeran confirms that the Behind the Curve team did not accurately portray the experiment as it occured and engaged in egregious selective editing. Jeran also alleges that they engaged various other underhanded tactics such as showing footage of a nearby run down house on cinder blocks and implying that it was his own.

Wow, thought Bob would never get to the point.

But he did.

So it sounds like even though he distances himself from the gyro saying he never touched it, it sounds like he is saying that it was showing the near 15 degrees per hour, including inside the zero gauss  chamber, however inside a Helmholtz coil the gyro stopped working.

Now a Helmholtz coil can be used to produce a weak magnetic field to cancel the earth's magnetic field, but if that was all it took, the zero gauss chamber should have stopped the gyro too.

A helmholtz coil can also be used to produce a powerful magnetic field - so I'm guessing that a powerful magnetic field shut down the gyro.

What he didn't mention, which I would love to know, is whether during this shutdown period the gyro was still working as a gyro for local rotation of artificial 15 deg/hr but ignoring the aether rotation, or if it was literally shut down and not sensing anything.

Reason being is because if it was still accurately sensing local rotation but not the aether rotation, then evidently the helmholtz coil blocks the 15 degrees per hour aether rotation but not actual functionality.

If the helmholtz coil blocks the aether's 15deg/h but doesn't block manually induced rotation of 15deg/h, then that is very significant.

However, it may be that a strong magntic field causes the gyro to lose sensitivity to slow rotations, so if the helmholtz blocks all rotation readings at 15deg/h then it's simply shutting it down and is not a useful datapoint, it just means that ring laser gyros have issues with strong magnetic fields that can prevent them from operating.

~~

Hmm. In the above video Bob said that the 15 degrees per hour would be different depending where on the flat earth you were, just like on a globe.


That doesn't make sense. Unless the aether is rotating at different speeds over different parts of the earth.

On the globe model, if the gyro's axis is oriented pointing up at local level, then yeah, if you're  on the poles, the gyro would read the 15deg/hr.

As you move toward the equator, keeping the gyro pointing up with regards to local level, the rotation would decrease and reach zero right on the equator.

But anywhere on earth if you pointed the gyro's axis at the north star, it would read the 15deg/hr.

However on a flat earth, I'm assuming that the aether turns all the same rate.

Or does it turn one way at the north pole, zero at the equator, and the other way at the ice ring?

Maybe that explains how the stars curve one way in the southern hemisplane, and the other way in the northern -- because the aether is rotating 15deg/hr one way in the center and 15deg/hr at the edge, and not at all on the equator.

It would be very interesting to take this gyro to the equator and tip it up 90 degrees and see if the axis of rotation was parallel to the ground there.

I would be surprised though if magnetism is involved because the earth's  magnetic field doesn't rotate at 15 degrees per hour. And if a laser ring gyro was sensitive to weak magnetic fields, they'd be very unreliable.

~~~

I feel bad for Jeran, he didn't have a single cameraman of his own and the film crew wouldn't share theirs. Always bring own cameraman.

According to Jeran, the result was inconclusive "A little of this and a little of that." He didn't comment on whether there was a single successful passage of light on either the flat or round earth position of the flashlight.

I would have liked to hear Jeran clarify whether or not a flat earth light path test did work once, and whether a curved earth light path worked once.

We believe the curved earth position worked once, since the film said so and Jeran didn't deny it in his followup, but Jeran also said "a little of this and a little of that" which sort of suggests there was some flat-earth results too, but he didn't actually come out and say it.

I look forward to followup experiments by both Bob and Jeran.

3

Suggestions & Concerns / I got a second warning for no reason

« on: March 04, 2019, 06:26:12 PM »

So I just checked into my second warning in 24 hours.

In the community section, which is clearly about things that effect the community, Tom and Bill said:

It should be noted that the Flat Earth Society was not consulted with the science of the documentary and that the topics discussed should be further researched.

Who in the Flat Earth Society is a recognized scientist of note?  Who would the makers of the film actually consult with?

to which I simply replied:

Who in the Flat Earth Society is a recognized scientist of note?  Who would the makers of the film actually consult with?

the great Flat Earth zetetic Dr. Tom Bishop
(https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator)

The description "the great Flat Earth zetetic Dr. Tom Bishop" was directly from the wiki.

The private message I got said it was for "off topic."

But how in the world is that off topic? It was about community. The question was who in the flat earth society should be consulted by film makers?
Seeing as how Dr. Tom seems to be very prominent here and have an answer for everything, it made sense to me.

Thanks

4

Suggestions & Concerns / Why the swinging Tarzan was I warned & topicanned?

« on: March 04, 2019, 06:45:13 AM »

I got my first warning today for "posting patterns" and it looks like all of my threads were moved to CN.

I'm trying to understand why.

I was essentially accused of "pretending to support the FE cause while actively undermining it,"  and of sometimes clever satire.

I was also advised to abide by the forum rules, but no particular rule was mentioned.

(I thought I was abiding by the forum rules.)

I was also cautioned that if I wished to defend the RE side I had to do it openly and sincerely.

Is FE or RE more important than the truth? I'm seeking after the truth. If I have a problem with an RE claim, it's because of an observation that raises a problem.
If I have a problem with an FE claim, it's because of an observation that raises a problem.

Why do I have to take the RE stance just to raise a concern with FE? Do glober's have to take a FE stance to raise an issue with RE?

Do all the long time flat earthers already know there's problems and have a pact to not say anything about them, and since I dared raise valid issues that I must be a glober pretending to be a flatter?

I'm particularly puzzled about the assertion in the warning that I have to take the RE position to question any aspect of FE, because even the "Read me first" header post for the upper fora says:

The top level Flat Earth Discussion Forums are a Debate Club. As in any debate club, the goal is to exercise your ability in debate to poke holes in arguments and expose weaknesses, even if you do not believe in that position yourself.
(https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10086.0)

(Emph mine)

What? How can they complain about what holes I poke in which theory after saying that? How can they say I'm "Undermining FE while pretending to support it?" when they clearly say "...even if you do not believe that position?"

And another thing that confuses me the stated reason that I was being warned because of posting patterns, when our very own manifesto says to moderators:

You shall apply the same rules equivalently to all members on the forum,
without invoking your personal opinion of a member, their posting history
or any factor other than the rules and their behaviour in the situation
at hand.
(https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1219.0)

Emph mine.

And yet I was warned for posting patterns...?
And what was the situation at hand for which I was warned?

And then there's the one odd fact that my first warning came after 257 posts, and it came the very day I questioned the Bishop Experiment which is listed in the wiki.

What's going on? If I poked any holes in FE in my search for truth, then the long time flat earth members could readily patch those holes by explaining the error in my thinking. But they didn't.

Welcome to the debate club where if you make too many points which disagree with the mods you get clubbed. I definitely call that a debate club.

I mean look. It's a private website. If the flat earth society wants to restrict the opinions to that of their website operator, that's fine if they are honest about it.
But pretending like it's a debate club and saying it's OK to poke holes in a theory even if you don't believe that position, and saying things like:

The Flat Earth Society holds that there is a difference between believing and knowing. If you don't know something, and cannot demonstrate it by first principles, then you shouldn't believe it. We must, at the very least, know exactly how conclusions were made about the world, and the strengths and weaknesses behind those deductions. Our society emphasizes the demonstration and explanation of knowledge.
(https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Flat_Earth_Wiki)

And

Flat Earth Theory, and Zeteticism, is a movement of emperical inquiry. We are empericists.
...
In our movement we value demonstration and are generally dismissive of those who make claims without reference to demonstration or the emperical evidence to back up those claims.

We have higher standards for science than most people.

I really don't see why I would be thus treated for anything  I did.

I believe in emperical inquiry and I have a very high standard for science.

That's why I went to all the trouble to test for gravity. It's not my fault that there was some unexplained weak attraction between my lead weights. (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=13661.msg183961#msg183961)

We present ourselves as very honest and willing to deal with any conundrum but then when someone actually raises issues it's "Put him back in his cage:"

Oh, hey, Treep's back. Let's put you back in your containment cage, shall we?

I have no idea what the Treep thing is about. If it's a reference to another  username, I assure you, this is the only account I ever created on this or any other flat earth website.

Look. The globers already know about the difficulties with flat earth. It's time we acknowledged them and begin to work on a solution.

Right now I'm seriously asking myself if I'm the only one here who isn't afraid to follow the evidence, wherever it leads.

All the globers of course already think they know the answers.

But all the flat earthers seem afraid to even ask the questions, like they are worried that the truth won't be what they thought.

Which is really sad because our whole theme in life is that NASA is lying, and covering up.
And how are we any better?

I do regret questioning the Bishop Experiment though, wish I hadn't done that, but hey I didn't know it was off limits.
And why would I know, when everything indicates that we're open for full debate and poking holes is allowed if we see a problem?

And for the record, I'm really truly looking for the truth. Whatever it is. Wherever it leads. If the truth leads to round earth? Fine. If the truth leads to flat earth? Even more fine. A flat earth is so much easier to deal with when it comes to all sorts of things.
I honestly am completely happy with a flat earth if that's where the evidence leads.

But it has to agree with observable reality.


Because like Dr. Bishop, I have a very high standard for science. I know there is a difference between believing and knowing. I believe in knowing. In testing. In observing.


Look. I'm really trying to make sense of this.


I really don't want to believe that the Moderation is doing exactly what they accuse NASA of doing. I refuse to believe it. But please help  me understand what's going on.

Thank you very much.