1761

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 16, 2021, 05:00:54 PM »

The biggest impossibility with Universal Acceleration is that you'd reach relativistic speeds within the month, and hit the speed of light within a year. From an initial velocity of 0, a constant acceleration of 9.8 m/s would mean that the Flat Earth would reach the speed of light in 11.6 months. So UA needs an entirely different physics paradigm, because depending on the age of the Earth, we would currently be experiencing a velocity that is trillions of times the speed of light.

I don't see why there should need to be a speed limit to the universe. Some experiments suggest that c can be surpassed. After the invention of SR scientists performed the Michelson-Morley light velocity experiment that assumed the Earth was moving on a horizontal plane with an experiment involving a moving detector in the laboratory:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Sagnac_Experiment

On p.306 of the book Unified Field Mechanics II we find a paper by Physicist José R. Croca, Ph.D. (bio), where we see:

  “  Since the realization of this [Sagnac] experiment, which has been done with photons [25], electrons [26] and neutrons [27], many trials have been made to interpret the observed results seen, for instance, Selleri [28]. Indeed, Sagnac utilized the habitual linear additive rule and with that he was able to correctly predict the observed results. Still, since his prediction lead to velocities greater than c and consequently are against relativity which claims that the maximal possible velocity is c this raised a large amount of arguing. In fact, many authors tried to explain the results of the experiment in the framework of relativity which assumed that the maximal possible velocity is c. As can be seen in the literature, there are almost as many explanations as the authors that have tried to explain the results in the framework of relativity. In some cases the same author [29] presents even more than one possible explanation. The complexity of the problem stems mainly from the fact that the experiment is done in a rotating platform. In such case, there may occur a possible accelerating effect leading the explanation of the experiment to fall in the framework of general relativity.

This controversy, whether Sagnac experiment is against or in accordance with relativity, was settled recently by R. Wang et al. [30] with a very interesting experimental setup they called linear Sagac interferometer. In this case the platform is still, what moves is a single mode optical fiber coil, Fig. 12.



They did the experiment with a 50 meter length linear interferometer with wheels of 30 cm. The observed relative phase shift difference for the two beams of light following in opposite directions along the optical fiber was indeed dependent only on the length of the interferometer and consequently independent of the angular velocity of the wheels. From the experimental results obtained with the linear Sagnac interferometer one is lead to conclude that in this particular case the linear additive rule applies. Consequently we may have velocities greater than c, which clearly shows that relativity is not adequate to describe this specific physical process. ”

See the bolded.

1762

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Shape of the lit area on the FE map vs EA

« on: December 16, 2021, 04:49:08 AM »

Maybe if our atmosphere were made of solid glass, then the demonstration would yield some useful insight. Otherwise I fail to see the relevance.

I'm fairly sure that there are more atoms in the atmosphere than there are in that piece of glass.

1763

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Shape of the lit area on the FE map vs EA

« on: December 15, 2021, 09:06:02 PM »

If you accept that the mediums and all affecting phenomena between the Sun and all points on Earth are not necessarily homogenous, there is a video on the Wiki showing how it could work on a Monopole model:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Southern_Hemisphere

So the "dome" is actually a chunk of glass magnifier that would crush us all if placed on top of us? What would be a better demonstration is a glass bowl upturned and placed over the monopole map. That would actually be a "dome". This guy's demonstration is worthless, it has no relevance to a "dome" because it isn't a dome.

I don't believe he indicated that there is literally a physically dome, and is giving it an example for how light could be affected by affecting phenomena above the earth.

1764

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Shape of the lit area on the FE map vs EA

« on: December 15, 2021, 07:29:50 PM »

If you accept that the mediums and all affecting phenomena between the Sun and all points on Earth are not necessarily homogenous, there is a video on the Wiki showing how it could work on a Monopole model:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Southern_Hemisphere

1765

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 15, 2021, 03:00:20 AM »

Dr. Edward Dowdye says that the medium of the Solar Corona bends light, not gravity. And the observations further away from the edge of the sun fails to match prediction.

http://beyondmainstream.org/nasa-scientist-says-coronas-bend-light-not-gravity/

So what?  Anyone can "say" anything.  Did he publish anything on this in any peer reviewed journal?  Not that I can find.

If you can show beyond reasonable doubt that the journals are unbiased I'll consider your argument.

See this quote:

"Science today is locked into paradigms. Every avenue is blocked by beliefs that are wrong, and if you try to get anything published by a journal today, you will run against a paradigm and the editors will turn it down." -- Fred Hoyle, British Mathematician and Astronomer

Fred Hoyle thought that journals were biased and unwilling to publish certain topics.

I also don't see that any journal has refuted and contradicted him.

1766

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 15, 2021, 01:26:28 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym6nlwvQZnE

You need to debunk that before an alternative explanation like UA can be taken seriously.

Actually, that experiment is inconsistent and it is admitted that the results are primarily caused by effects which are not gravity. See: https://wiki.tfes.org/Cavendish_Experiment

1767

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Reasoning behind the Universal Accelerator

« on: December 15, 2021, 01:16:59 AM »

Dr. Edward Dowdye says that the medium of the Solar Corona bends light, not gravity. And the observations further away from the edge of the sun fails to match prediction.

http://beyondmainstream.org/nasa-scientist-says-coronas-bend-light-not-gravity/

1768

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Canada is a $#!/hole country

« on: December 13, 2021, 06:14:35 AM »

Fighting for freedom against the horrors of the Canadian hospitality industry.

This is nothing like a hospitality industry incident. In most cases you can just leave the hotel to feed or medicate yourself. The government was preventing her from leaving and was not providing proper accommodation for her health condition in their quarantine program. It's Canada's fault.

1769

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 12, 2021, 10:39:49 AM »

Yes; modern doctors do know exactly what causes cancer, and it's not germs, as Rowbotham believed.

Please read the quote you posted. This is an incorrect restatement. The quote says that the nervous system can be degraded by germs, as well as by "causes other than germs". The quote is speaking of the nervous system in the role of disease, and not specifically cancer, and states that it is also degraded by causes other than germs. Your statement is incorrect.

Cancer is caused by gene mutations to the DNA within cells. The DNA inside a cell is packaged into a large
number of individual genes, each of which contains a set of instructions telling the cell what functions to
perform, as well as how to grow and divide. Errors in these instructions can cause the cell to stop its normal
function, and can allow the cell to become cancerous.  A number of things can cause gene mutations, such
as smoking, radiation, carcinogens, hormone imbalance, or chronic tissue inflammation.

A nice story, but they don't know what is occurring on a biochemical level and how everything interacts with each other, and how those environmental effects which were identified affects the bodily system in all its pathways and ends up turning into cancer. Cancer research and research of possible in vivo remedies are still ongoing.

It is seen that smoking and radiation could also degrade the nervous system as well.

Smoking:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090623090400.htm

"Researchers, led by Debapriya Ghosh and Dr Anirban Basu from the Indian National Brain Research Center (NBRC), have found that a compound in tobacco provokes white blood cells in the central nervous system to attack healthy cells, leading to severe neurological damage."

Radiation:

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull3-4/03405800607.pdf

"Until recently it had been generally believed that the tissue of the nervous system was especially resistant to radiation and that any kind of damage to it could occur only at extremely high radiation doses. Over the past few years, however, there has been increasing evidence to show that the nervous system responds to even small doses of radiation and that this response may often be associated with some form of radiation damage."

And as a former cancer sufferer (more than 30 years ago) I can assure that doctors do know how to eradicate it.

You can't possibly think that surgery, radiation therapy and chemo are cures or preventatives for cancer, as I indicated were lacking.

Tellingly, in Rowbotham's day, cancer killed everybody who developed it, and he couldn't do anything about it
other than selling his elixir.  Nor could doctors even diagnose it back then.

This is incorrect as well. See these cancer facts reproduced from the American Cancer Society -

https://web.archive.org/web/20150310060321/http://thomlatimercares.org/Cancer_Facts.htm

For a modern oncologist practicing traditional oncology 60% of their patients would be dead within 5 years.

According to that same article above, in the 1930's before modern oncology, 75% of cancer patients would have died within 5 years. 1 in 4 would people would have survived by their own natural survival mechanisms.

From the article:

How Many People Are Surviving Cancer?

In the early 1900s, few cancer patients had any hope of long-term survival. In the 1930s, about one in four was alive five years after treatment. About 491,400 Americans, or 4 of 10 patients who get cancer this year, are expected to be alive five years after diagnosis.

So in the 1930's 75% of cancer patients would have died within 5 years

"This year" (modern) the statistics are that 6 out of 10, or about 60% of cancer patients, die within five years

Modern medicine and its trillions of dollars have added a whooping 15% survival rate, and this is ignoring the many people who regress years later. How great is modern oncology at fighting cancer, really?

See, this is the main problem for all of these muh science sentiments in general. In your OP you declare modern science to have created "massive advances" when this could be abjectly false. You are appealing to popular lore and dogma, without actually bothering to show the claims from first principles.

1770

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 11, 2021, 11:14:49 PM »

At any rate, it's obvious that the good doctor had not the faintest notion of what actually caused cancer.

You are implying that modern doctors know what causes cancer. If they knew exactly what caused cancer on a biological and biochemical level they would know exactly how to prevent and cure it, which they do not.

Rowbotham had it on the money that nervous system degradation and disorders are associated with cancer though. The most common type of skin cancer is Melanoma, and it is "surprising" that it is associated with the nervous system disorder Parkinson's Disease.

https://parkinsonsdisease.net/clinical/melanoma-skin-cancer-link

A Surprising Relationship: Parkinson’s Disease & Melanoma

Melanoma is a type of skin cancer that develops from melanocytes, and Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a progressive movement disorder that affects the nervous system.

~

The link between melanoma & Parkinson’s

The relationship between melanoma and PD runs both ways: Specifically, people with PD are 4x more likely to develop melanoma, and people with melanoma have 4x the risk of developing PD.¹

Maybe this is surprising to the parkinsonsdisease.net editors, but Rowbotham wouldn't be surprised. The association with nervous system degradation and cancer was long predicted by Samuel Rowbotham in the Victorian Era.

1771

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 11, 2021, 09:18:41 AM »

It's right there in the pamphlet, "'Plain Syrup of Phosphorus' is a real most effectual remedy."

That may be so, but Rowbotham says it's not a cure-all and he mixes it with other medicaments for treatment of the diseases he treats. Rowbotham indicates that phosphorous on its own is only good for certain conditions.

Umm, lots of things "are associated with increased risk of cancer at several specific sites."

Yes. The ailments associated with higher risk of cancer are indicative that certain systems are degraded in the body to cause it.

Schizophrenia and vulnerability to stress are associated with increased risk of Breast Cancer, which is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18492-8

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women worldwide¹. Some evidence suggests that vulnerability to stress^2,3,4, particularly indicated by the presence of psychiatric disorders including schizophrenia^5,6, may be associated with increased risk of subsequent breast cancer.

~

Schizophrenia was associated with a 49% increased risk of subsequent invasive breast cancer (95% confidence interval [CI], 37–63%, P = 1.72 × 10−19; Table 1).

~

Despite lower screening attendance¹⁹, it has recently been recognized that patients with schizophrenia are at increased risk of breast cancer⁶ but not of cancer overall^30,31.

1772

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 08:38:53 AM »

The photons and electomagnetic signals aren't physically attached to the building or clocks when they are released. Everything isn't moving upwards together at all times.

1773

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 08:01:58 AM »

How does UA modulate earth not "moving towards the released photons or signals at the same rate at all times"? How does that work?

It works by grasping the concept of acceleration and visualizing why it would hurt more when walking off a chair than a skyscraper.

1774

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:47:08 AM »

Not too surprising. A lot of doctors were claiming that phosphorous was effective for a number of ailments.

Doesn't matter. You said, "What you quoted does not state that phosphorous can resolve all nervous system impairments.". Sure, the claim is not all, but a bunch.

Incorrect. He says that a lot of diseases are associated with nervous system degradation. This is not a statement that phosphorous can resolve everything he stated. It's a statement that a lot of diseases are associated with nervous system degradation.

Part of the problem is that he claimed every ailment was due to a "nervous disorder". Cancer, really? Caused by a nervous disorder?

Actually research of recent decades has found that certain nervous system disorders are associated with increased risk of cancer:

https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-017-0466-y

"During the past decades, a series of epidemiological observational studies and meta-analyses have claimed that central nervous disorders are associated with increased risk of cancer at several specific sites"

Clearly, Rowbotham was ahead of his time in medical science as well.

1775

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:33:29 AM »

You didn't answer the question. Observers A & B, the clocks, the building they are in, the earth, are all accelerating at exactly the same rate, together. How does UA make the clocks tick differently?

The earth isn't moving towards the released photons or signals at the same rate at all times. Once the signal of the lower clock hits the detector at the bottom the earth is still moving at an increasing pace into the line of photons from the second higher clock.

If a clock at a lower height releases a photon at the same time as a clock from a higher height, the photons will not experience the earth hitting them at the same velocity. The earth is moving into the photon released from the second clock at a greater rate, as it has more time to build up speed.

1776

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:27:38 AM »

Not too surprising. A lot of doctors were claiming that phosphorous was effective for a number of ailments.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Samuel_Rowbotham

Phosphorous has a rich history. Throughout the 1800's higher doses of phosphorous was closely studied by the medical community for its medicinal benefits. Phosphorous was said to be beneficial and curative for a number of ailments.

Neuralgia

From a medical text: Phosphorous in the Treatment of Nerualgia (1875) in Transactions of the American Neurological Association, Volume 1, we find that Phosphorous was highly beneficial for treating Neuralgia:

  “ Compared with the whole range of diseases in which phosphorus is said to have been tested, the list of affections in which it has been proven to be benef‌icial that I have to offer covers a narrow f‌ield.

In the relief of the cruel pains to which the cranial nerves are so commonly subject, and in the cure of the neuralgic condition itself, I have found phosphorus deserving of all the praise that has been bestowed upon it. Its curative effect upon the pure neuralgias, especially of the trigeminus, almost establishes its right to the title of a specif‌ic against this particular affection. (A glance at the condensed table of results will show, without the necessity of repetition, the number of cases of trifacial or trigeminal neuralgia, etc., treated, whether complicated or uncomplicated, and the result.) In the large number of these trigeminal cases, the cure or relief followed the administration of the drug very speedily, often in twenty-four to forty-eight hours, and the same remark applies to the cases of cervico-occipital neuralgia. ”

A list of cases appears here

Cholera

Phosphorous has also been used to treat Cholera, producing success in even "advanced stages of Cholara, usually regarded as hopeless". From Materia Medica and Therapeutics (1857) on p.649 we see:

  “ Phosphorus has been employed successfully by an English physician, in the advanced stage of cholera, usually regarded as hopeless. In 1833 he published his experience with this medicine in the London Lancet, and in the same journal for February, 1850, he reiterates the same views. His reliance has been chief‌ly on the following prescription:

R.—Phosphor. ӡSS;
Cer. alb. ӡSS.
With the aid of enough water to avoid combustion, rub these articles well together, divide the mass into ten pills, which should be kept in a small bottle containing pure water.

In far-advanced cases, these pills were the only reliable medicine. One was given every ten minutes, followed by a little water. Three pills usually sufficed to arrest the cramps, the vomiting and purging. In milder cases, the f‌irst medicine given was as follows:—

R.—Nit. acid fort., from three to f‌ive drops;
Tinct. opii, four to eight drops;
Syrup croci, a drachm;
Aquæ, an ounce and a half.

Mix for a draught, which very frequently answered the end in view. If this failed, the pills were administered as above stated.

Some six or eight cases are detailed to show the value of this practice. (See London Lancet, February, 1850.) ”

Fevers, Delerium, Tremors

In Materia Medica and Therapeutics Dr. Mitchell relays the following accounts:

  “ A considerable number of cases reported by Dr. Wolff, in 1793, would seem to show the good effects of phosphoric ether in low fevers attended with delirium, tremors, feeble pulse, petecchiæ, &c. Five drops of a very strong solution were given every three hours. The pulse improved after a few doses had been given, and equable heat pervaded the system, a pleasant moisture covered the skin, and the delirium subsided. Much testimony of a similar nature could be adduced; and there can be no doubt that salutary results have followed in judicious hands. It is true, however, that much mischief was apparent, as the consequence of the indiscriminate employment of the article, in the days of its greatest celebrity. ”

Overdose Risk

Phosphorous research by the medical community was possibly discontinued because of its poisonous effects when abused:

From the Materia Medica and Therapeutics section titled Phospherous A Poison we see:

  “ A French chemist determined to test the power of phosphorus in his own person, and took a grain, with a good deal of sugar, for his f‌irst dose. On the next day he tried two grains, and on the next, three. Violent vomiting soon came on, with inf‌lammation of the bowels, delirium, spasms, &c., and although vigorous measures were adopted, he perished, a victim of his own folly. ”

Further Reading

Phosphorus: Its Claims as a Therapeutic Agent by Wm. Mason Turner, B. Ph: M.D.

1777

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:22:34 AM »

It has everything to do with it. The Earth will be moving at a different rate to a ball that is released from a higher altitude versus a ball at a lower altitude. They do not experience the same thing.

No one is releasing a "ball" of anything. I have no idea what you're referring to. Please refer yourself to this previous example - The scenario is: Two people just standing, each staring at a clock - Both clocks sync'd to the same time - observer A is in the basement and observer B is 150 floors above.

Again, does the constant rate mentioned in the wiki actually change the higher up you go? Is observer B's clock running faster than observer A's? And if so, how does UA make that happen?

At some point the photons or signals are moving independently of the clocks, through a medium, to the detector below. The Earth is accelerating into the photons, causing the higher clock to appear to tick faster. See the previous examples from literature and look up what accelerate means.

How does UA make that time difference happen? According to the wiki, Observer A and his clock is accelerating upward at exactly the same as observer B and his clock along with the building itself. There should be no difference, everyone and everything is moving together at the same rate. How does UA cause photons to move independently of everything else that is moving upward together?

Look up the difference between linear movement and accelerated movement.





The Earth is accelerating, not moving at a linear rate.

The Earth will, therefore, accelerate into a long line of photons at a greater rate than a shorter line of photons.

1778

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:08:34 AM »

It has everything to do with it. The Earth will be moving at a different rate to a ball that is released from a higher altitude versus a ball at a lower altitude. They do not experience the same thing.

No one is releasing a "ball" of anything. I have no idea what you're referring to. Please refer yourself to this previous example - The scenario is: Two people just standing, each staring at a clock - Both clocks sync'd to the same time - observer A is in the basement and observer B is 150 floors above.

Again, does the constant rate mentioned in the wiki actually change the higher up you go? Is observer B's clock running faster than observer A's? And if so, how does UA make that happen?

At some point the photons or signals are moving independently of the clocks, through a medium, to the detector below. The Earth is accelerating into the photons, causing the higher clock to appear to tick faster, and clocks above that to tick even faster. See the previous rocket ship examples from literature and look up what accelerate means.

1779

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 11, 2021, 07:04:59 AM »

What you quoted does not state that phosphorous can resolve all nervous system related impairments.

If I say that apples rot from bacteria it doesn't mean that my product that delays or prevents rot is going to be effective towards all types of bacteria or all rot. The statements have nothing to do with each other.

1780

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravitational Time Dilation on Flat Earth

« on: December 11, 2021, 06:52:35 AM »

It has everything to do with it. The Earth will be moving at a different rate to a ball that is released from a higher altitude versus a ball at a lower altitude. They do not experience the same thing.

Please look up the definition of accelerate. It does not mean to travel at a set velocity. Refer yourself to this previous explanation for why time appears to pass quicker for a clock at a higher elevation of an upwardly accelerating rocket:

From p.8 of Cosmological Physics by John A. Peacock, PhD. we read the following:

  “ Many of the important features of general relativity can be obtained via rather simple arguments that use the equivalence principle. The most famous of these is the thought experiment that leads to gravitational time dilation, illustrated in figure 1.1. Consider an accelerating frame. which is conventionally a rocket of height h, with a clock mounted on the roof that regularly disgorges photons towards the floor. If the rocket accelerates upwards at g, the floor acquires a speed v = gh / c in the time taken for a photon to travel from roof to floor. There will thus be a blueshift in the frequency of received photons, given by Δv / v = gh / c^2, and it is easy to see that the rate of reception of photons will increase by the same factor.

Now, since the rocket can be kept accelerating for as long as we like, and since photons cannot be stockpiled anywhere, the conclusion of an observer on the floor of the rocket is that in a real sense the clock on the roof is running fast. When the rocket stops accelerating, the clock on the roof will have gained a time Δt by comparison with an identical clock kept on the floor. Finally, the equivalence principle can be brought in to conclude that gravity must cause the same effect. Noting that ΔΦ = gh is the difference in potential between roof and floor, it is simple to generalize this to Δt / t = ΔΦ / c^2 ”



“ Figure 1.1. Imagine you are in a box in free space far from any source of gravitation. If the box is made to accelerate ‘upwards’ and has a clock that emits a photon every second mounted on its roof, it is easy to see that you will receive photons more rapidly once the box accelerates (imagine yourself running into the line of oncoming photons). Now, according to the equivalence principle, the situation is exactly equivalent to the second picture in which the box sits at rest on the surface of the Earth. Since there is nowhere for the excess photons to accumulate, the conclusion has to be that clocks above us in a gravitational field run fast. ”

If there were another story to the rocket, and the clock were twice as high, the floor of the rocket would be increasing velocity into the photons even faster, and the time for the elevated clock on the ceiling of the second story of the rocket would appear to be moving faster.

The floor of the rocket is accelerating into the line of photons, causing them to intersect with the detector on the floor at an increased pace. The longer the line of photons, the greater rate. A clock at increasingly higher altitudes with appear to tick increasingly faster.