21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why do the magnetic poles exist?

« on: December 07, 2022, 02:05:31 PM »

I don't fully understand how magnetism is generated in this way, but I think the Earth spins the same as in RE anyway so..  Am I off the hook?

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why do the magnetic poles exist?

« on: December 07, 2022, 01:27:49 PM »

It's the same process as round Earth I assume except it's a flat disc magnet.   Lava, dynamos, all that stuff I don't understand and have no reason to question.

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Are there any 2d projections that are widely accepted by FE?

« on: December 07, 2022, 08:38:35 AM »

I think most projections are to make a spherical map more readable...  If you start with a Flat Map then you don't really need to add anything...  Perhaps some topographical features etc..

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why do the magnetic poles exist?

« on: December 07, 2022, 08:36:33 AM »

I don't really understand your question...  Why do magnets have poles?

25

Technology & Information / Re: T-minus 10 hours - Artemis Mission to Moon

« on: November 29, 2022, 11:45:21 PM »

This is sort of interesting... A live view of the moon from the Orion Capsule...



Edit:. I don't think this feed is live bc I keep seeing the same images ...  NASA isn't publishing live feed 24/7 bc they share the deep space communication network used by others -  but there trying. 

26

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Does the Sun appear larger in the morning?

« on: November 28, 2022, 06:28:47 PM »

I think the world spins and the sun is stationary.  The reason the sun doesn't light up the whole world is because of the way the Earth tilts towards the sun and how the light bends around the atmosphere....  This creates areas of light and areas of dark on Earth.  That's why we can use time zones but it's generally 12pm when the sun is directy over a  location...

 Time zones I guess are important so everyone starts and ends a calendar day at the same time...  I think 12am in Greenwich UK is when a new day officially starts followed by the countries approaching 12am midnight ..

27

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Does the Sun appear larger in the morning?

« on: November 26, 2022, 07:08:05 PM »

I used a pencil compass with two sharp ends...  I think I removed enough glare for accurate measurements...  I used the trees in the morning and the trees/sunglasses in the afternoon. 

28

Flat Earth Investigations / Does the Sun appear larger in the morning?

« on: November 26, 2022, 02:24:55 PM »

Hey Guys,

I'm running an experiment to see if the Sun changes its apparent diameter from Sunrise to Noon...

This morning in NY at 8:00AM i measured the sun as 3/8th's of an inch accross (a little less then a 1/2 inch).  I'll check again around solar noon. 

UPDATE:  I measured the width of the sun again at 11:40AM.  It appeard to be between 1/8 and 1/4th of an inch long (a little less then a 1/4 inch)   

I'll double check the results later, but right now the sun seems to appear smaller around noon.

29

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Blatant Lies of National Geographic

« on: November 23, 2022, 05:33:25 PM »

So if we can detect curvature only a few miles out to sea, then shouldn't we be able to detect curvature accross the sea?   

I happen to believe that the earth starts to appear spherical from the sky, because of atmospheric refraction (the bending of images and light, etc)... 

Using the method of measuring two or three objects accross a certain distance from another, minimizes the same problems you get with measuring one object at a distance (on sea) - wind, ocean swell, and local refraction phenomena...  Because you can get an average of how high each "ship" is relative to one another, how verticle there masts are and the angles they point away from one another...   Doing this experiment on land with a few buildings or flag poles may also work.

30

Flat Earth Community / Re: Why can't I always see the sun if the sun is always above the earth?

« on: November 23, 2022, 01:43:25 PM »

I see your point.  Why can't you just see the Sun and every other celestrial object 24/7 with a big enough telescope... 

The answer is there's a few things which may explain this...   Perspective, or the natural tendancy for distant objects to appear lower to a viewer, atmospheric interference - like fog except over 1000's of miles, or refraction which is the bending of light or images off the atmosphere...  The below link offer's an example and other ideas/objections to consider.

See "Comprehensive explanation of sunsets" https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=19650.0

31

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Blatant Lies of National Geographic

« on: November 22, 2022, 05:40:11 PM »

If you watched three sail boats sailing away and slowly disappearing because of the earths curvature, then wouldn't you need to assume that the tops of those ships wouldn't be parallel to one another? 



Sorry to hijack this post, but it is similar.

32

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: The Blatant Lies of National Geographic

« on: November 22, 2022, 04:26:05 PM »

Technically, if the earth were round, wouldn't the horizon take a spherical shape?

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 20, 2022, 04:27:08 PM »

I'm afraid to continue this argument because I don't want to come accross as disrespectful...  I get your point.  It's sinking in.   I'd be lying if I said I can conceptualize this fully though.

Questions like.. if exhaust fumes do nothing compared to the internal action/reaction principle, then what happens if we move the exhaust of a jet in different directions?  Nothing really?  What if we turned the exhaust of  a rocket 180 degrees...  Would the rocket still move forward?  I'm compelled to give credit to the enormous wind power generated by these machines.

But seriously, I know I am a newbie to mechanics so I will read and probably start experimenting with household objects like a garden hose and how much recoil I get at different water settings.. 

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 20, 2022, 01:21:10 PM »

This opposite force created by accelerating matter is new to me...  I'll investigate and thank you for your time.

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 20, 2022, 09:25:38 AM »

I'll take a closer look at the Thrust equation...  I appreciate your feedback.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 20, 2022, 08:38:02 AM »

If Jets and Rockets are propelled as a reaction to moving the mass of fuel at a high velocity in one direction rather than on the exhaust fumes pushing against air, then there should be some information which could confirm the answer. 

Do Rockets and Jet engines maintain constant thrust regardless of their altitude, air pressure, or speed? I understand Jets depend on air intake for power so maybe this can't be answered.  But this kind of data would help understand what principles are propelling these vehicles.

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 19, 2022, 08:12:31 PM »

Hi Guys,

Please consider the picture above.  I am unsure where the "thrust" is generated in a rocket.  More importantly, where does the friction occur between the Gas and another object to get an Action/Reaction.  Hot Gas is hitting what exactly to propel the rocket in the opposite way? 

MarkJo says the Gas is hitting the Bell/Thruster.   Another says it's Gas on Gas.  I think it's Gas on Air.   I've labeled each possibility in the picture above. 

Once the gas hits a medium, it generates back pressure which propels a rocket forward.   The circular flat injection plate is the location where gas pressure pushes against the Saturn V rocket to propel it forward. 

Naturally this is a confusing subject.  I'd like to conclude by asking why a rocket should behave any differently than an afterburner on a jet.  It uses very hot gas to push against air in the exhaust "bell".  Assuming space isn't a "complete" zero vacuum, then why shouldn't it work the same?

And stack, Newton made it clear that MASS is important in the action/reaction equation.  The greater the mass of one object compared to another, the less it will move. 

38

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 19, 2022, 01:47:52 AM »

Thank you everyone for your responses.  Please give me a day to adaquetly respond.

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 18, 2022, 08:23:03 PM »

I'll be honest, Markjo, Tumeni - I've considered your arguments and read your literature...

Nobody, and I mean nobody, really goes into detail about how rockets behave in a vacuum.  They try, but nobody, not even the rocket builders go into detail about how "newton's" law of momentum explains everything...  It stills leaves a big question mark about the simple question of - how do you push against nothing?  A gun explodes against a bullet.  A rocket explodes against nothing.. A vacuum, which by definition pulls things away from an object; not remain stationary to cause an opposite reaction which is needed to propel another object the opposite way (like Newton said). 

That being said, I don't discredit the argument that rockets push off their own fumes.  It seems silly, but I might be missing something here..

But here's the problem...    I have two ideas for how Rockets work.  The first is that Rockets do propel themselves.  Rockets take off, enter earth's orbit - and if they don't stay there = they use rockets again to leave orbit and point themselves at another target like the moon or mars, etc... 

Why do they shut off?  Possible cost restraints but I find this hard to believe.  The earth's gravity is what slows the Lunar spacecraft before approaching the moon (to about 2,500mph) before they use thrusters again..

So, it seems like most of their speed and braking power were gained by orbiting earth and later by possibly orbiting the moon or just using earth's gravity to gradually accelerate the spacecraft back to earth.

Now here's the second theory:  What if the rockets performed well within earth's atmosphere, then entered earth orbit - which in my opinion is solar winds going around earth consisting of some matter - then rockets are used briefly to exit the solar winds, at which time the spacecraft has enough momentum in a "limited vacuum" to go to there destination with course corrections on the way.   

What about rockets working better in a vacuum?  Why?  Because the gas can exit the "thrusters" at a higher speed.

Okay, but rarely mentioned is that rockets also are freer from gravity and atmospheric friction which allows it to travel faster.... 

But, more importantly, rockets will work just as well in a "semi-vacuum" using a little bit of matter to "push off of" as I'm suggesting...

I'm gonna be mad when the final answer to "do rockets work in a vacuum" is - well, it depends on what you mean by a vacuum... An absolute vacuum or a semi-vacuum?

Either way it's an impasse...  NASA builds the rockets and they say they work in a vacuum...   I believe it's probably a combination of both "gas pushing on gas" and "gas pushing on matter" like jets do. 

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Rockets work in a vacuum

« on: November 18, 2022, 05:27:48 PM »

I think I said the skater had long arms, but either way I agree with you.  Lol.

That's interesting info you provided about rocket burns with SoaceX and NASA.  I didn't know they generally coasted once they reach a Target attitude.

This sort of lends evidence to the idea that rockets work best in an atmosphere...Or they need an atmosphere. 

  Why not keep firing rockets in the middle of there trip to the moon if it gets them there sooner?