481

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 25, 2018, 03:58:14 PM »

Following the same logical sequence, you should be weightless on the side of the moon that faces the earth.  Both you and the moon would be exposed to the same force of UA.  Then, if you walked around to the 'dark side of the moon' that faces away from the earth, you could expect to weigh the same as you do on earth because of the shielding of the dark force by the mass of the moon.  Of course, if you did videos of all that it would be deemed to be totally factual because it would support all the suppositions of FET.  None of these assumptions would answer another question.  For each action, you must have and equal and opposite action.  If the dark force is pushing on and accelerating the Earth, Moon, and Sun, what fixed object is the dark force pushing back against?  Maybe what will be needed is a Flat Galaxy Theory.

482

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 25, 2018, 03:15:04 PM »

You can see with your bare eyes that the universal acceleration must be accelerating at least the Earth, Moon, and Sun.  Otherwise the Moon and Sun would either come crashing down to the Earth's surface, or would drift off into space somewhere. 

483

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Help Me debunk this stupid video

« on: October 25, 2018, 03:11:05 PM »

If you want, you can consult radioreference.com and they will clue you in on how to listen to the ISS on your own radio.  I did this many years ago and actually heard radio traffic from space myself.  Again, this is not proof.  The government could be up in airplanes with a radio from time to time and simulating a conversation with someone on the ground.  If my wife sent me out to get a loaf of bread at the local grocery store and I came back and told her that the store was out of bread, how could I 'prove' that I actually went out and looked and didn't just go to the local bar?  I can imagine that there were people at the dock when Columbus left on his trip who thought that he was just going to sail off the edge of the earth.  Time proved that the prediction wasn't true.  Now fast forward a couple hundred years.  Mankind is trying to cobble together the technology the leave the earth.  The most likely destination will be Mars.  People, again, are worried that the first space explorers will be 'sailing' off and will 'fall off the edge'.  Past history can't prove anything that will be happening in the future, but that's the way to bet.

484

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 25, 2018, 02:50:54 AM »

I have done a little research and did quickly read thru a couple of papers that outline the effects of the earths atmosphere on radio waves.  Mostly these papers outlined things that I have witnessed for myself.  Things like rain and fog can attenuate microwave signals a lot.  TV stations typically have their studio downtown.  The transmit site is usually out in the country so they can construct 1000+ towers.  All the programming is then transmitted by a dedicated microwave link from studio to transmit site.  In my years sitting out at the transmitter and monitoring the equipment, I had a meter that would monitor the strength of the microwave signal coming from the studio.  Under certain weather conditions, like heavy rain, I would sometimes see the signal go right down into the noise for a couple of seconds before recovering.  Heavy fog could make things a little shaky too.  I looked at another paper that outlined the recommended procedures for commissioning a microwave link.  One of the important considerations was the curvature of the earth.  Atmospheric bending was also a factor and could actually increase the expected range a little.  All these considerations are often obscured because of other things like hills or tall buildings that may be in the path.  The bottom line is that the curvature of the earth definitely limits the expected range of a microwave link.  This statement isn't speculation, its the result of thousands of microwave links constructed.  Believe me, a practical business man will cut corners and save money where ever possible.  You can bet that a few have tried to 'scam the system' a little and try to get a microwave link working that was just too far over the horizon.  The results were probably as expected and the antenna had to be put on a bigger tower at more expense.  Like I have always said 'It isn't nice to try to fool mother nature'.  In this case Mother Nature has a global earth.  It isn't me making the argument it's the inanimate, brainless, microwave equipment that is making the determination.     

485

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 25, 2018, 12:12:41 AM »

There's another problem with the sun.  The sun can't really be using the standard fusion model.  That model requires that the sun have gravity and a mass & size more than 100 times that of the earth.  Without a source of compression (supplied by gravity), the atoms of hydrogen just won't start the fusion reaction.  So just what is the source of energy that's supplied by the sun?  The folks in the solar panel business have a nominal figure that they use to estimate how much energy you can get per square foot of panel.  The source of energy would have to be capable of supplying at least that well known amount at a distance of 3000 miles.  You can also measure the temperature of the moon from the earth.  I have a hand held heat gun that works the same way.  Any energy source would also have to match what the measured temperature of the moon appears to be.  An estimate of the temperature of the sun is known as well.  How can all these requirements be met without using the fusion paradigm?

486

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 24, 2018, 09:06:42 PM »

The dark energy that's accelerating the earth seems to push it along like wind in a sail.  It has been said that the earth's mass shields the dark energy and keeps everything on the earth in place so all you feel is the upward acceleration of the earth at your feet.  Then it seems that the dark energy bends around the earth, recombines, and pushes on the sun and moon.  The earth, sun, and moon must have some characteristic in common relative to the dark energy because the effects of the dark energy on all three bodies are the same.  Otherwise, you would see with your bare eyes either the sun and moon crashing down to the earth, or departing slowly to parts unknown.  You could hypothesize that the sun, moon, and earth all have the same mass, and it's the mass of a body that determines how much push it receives from the dark energy.  That would mean that all the bodies would have to have different densities and all those densities would have to be exactly right for the system to work.  You can see that the area just won't work at all.  Then you have to conservation of energy question.  If the dark energy is pushing on the earth, it will be giving up energy and loose some of it's potential to push on the sun and moon.  If you take a couple of magnets and turn them so they repel each other then you can push one along with the other. However you will have to be providing a force with the one magnet.  What is the dark energy pushing against on the other side?  Any action will produce and equal and opposite reaction.  Maybe that law will have to be thrown out as well.  Also the sun seems to change orbits in the different seasons.  If you want to change an orbit to a smaller one you will have to do two things.  Number one is to provide a force on the outside of the moon to tighten up the orbit, and another, slow the sun down.  A smaller circle will require a slower speed to keep the orbit time constant.  Is the dark energy also providing all these services? 

487

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 24, 2018, 08:29:08 PM »

Wow, it really looks like I poked the bear here!  My whole point for my last post was a challenge for the FET supporters.  Put your money where your mouth is.  I can't tell you how many times I've been in a competitive bidding situation where the potential customer was specifying a desired service area and my challenge was to provide radio communications (VHF, or UHF) at the cheapest price possible.  I also needed to make a profit.  All our systems were based upon the fact that any communications range is limited by line of sight (mostly) and line of sight is limited by the curvature of the earth.  If the FET model really works in the real world, then now is the time for some young enterprising individual to get out there, get into the radio communications business, and start quoting cheaper systems based upon FET.  You will be at a distinct advantage because you won't need as tall a tower or can use lower power (cheaper) radios in your bid.  The only proviso will be that after you get finished installing the system, your customer will quickly determine if you can deliver on the specified range that was stated in the bid.  It's just that simple. If FET works, then take advantage of that, get out there, and make a fortune.  I'm retired now so it won't matter anymore for me, but if I were still in business I wouldn't be worried at all. Now you've seen all my moves, let the FET radio guys get out there and prove me wrong with an actual working system.  Good Luck. 

488

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 24, 2018, 04:27:55 PM »

We are on the same page there.  This whole thing is like a couple of boxers getting ready for a big fight.  Both sides talk 'smack' and try to build excitement and a paying audience.  Eventually, the boxers have to enter the ring and do their thing. The result may be scripted, or may not.  I have proposed my view of FET.  If the paradigm works then VHF, UHF, and microwave communications should offer a whole lot more range because the signals won't have to deal with the curvature of the earth.  The current installed systems utilize tall towers to enhance service area.  Just look at what the TV stations put up.  Years ago my first 'real' job was as a transmitter engineer at one of the local TV stations.  I sat under a 1000 foot tower and baby sat  TV and FM transmitters.  The initial cost and the maintenance of that tower was substantial.  With the FET paradigm you should be able to get the same service area with a tower at 250 feet.  It could even be 100 feet but we live in an area with lots of hills and valleys.  The round earth folks have made their moves and have put up extensive radio networks based on all the disadvantages of the round earth theory. Now it's time for the FET folks to stop talking and start putting up their VHF, UHF, and microwave systems with lower power and lower towers and save a bunch of money.  That advantage should drive prices a lot lower.  It's time to stop talking theory and start building real systems.  Everyone will quickly find out what will really work in the real world.  Personally I have known all my life on which side to place my bet.     

489

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moons - How?

« on: October 24, 2018, 02:11:07 PM »

The eternal plane paradigm would preclude having any dark energy swirling around the edge of the earth and pushing up on the sun and moon.  How would you get around the plane if it's eternal?  You could say that the dark energy could flow thru the earth and provide an acceleration to an object according to it's mass.  That would keep all the small stuff on the earth's surface.  If that same dark energy was also keeping the sun and moon at a constant distance from the earth then the accelerations would be the same.  Now, if that is the case then the mass of the sun and moon would have to be the same as the earth.  I'm assuming that the sun and moon are composed of different substances.  One substance (extremely dense) would have to provide a lot of heat (sun) and the other would have to be cool (moon).  Additionally the same dark energy would have to contain the atmolayer to the top surface of the earth.  That's a very tall order for dark energy.  Somehow it can provide just the right amount of push on all kinds of objects and get them all to stay in their assigned locations.  Is that same dark energy pushing on the side of the sun when necessary to change the orbit to so the seasons change?  Now you have dark energy that can provide a push in multiple directions because after the sun moves to a larger orbit, it will have to be pushed in the opposite direction to move back.  It's also smart.  It knows when it time for winter, spring, summer, and fall.  I'm going to need a cell phone application to keep track of all that.  If you believe in Occam's razor, gravity would make a lot more sense.

490

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Antarctic Treaty

« on: October 24, 2018, 04:54:38 AM »

There are many folks that believe that they have been to the south pole.  Probably it's not just a photo-shopped job.  There's a research building there as well.  If you look up PanAm flight 50 you can see that there was a flight over both the North and South pole.  Just another fake?  Well, probably not.  On the flat earth model the South Pole should be right at the edge of the disk.  Can you fly over it, or will you get hit by the flow of the dark energy force flowing around the edges from the bottom? I guess the folks on flight 50 didn't or they kept everything quiet.   On the map the South Pole should be a single point that includes the entire outer edge of the map.  That does make a little sense as the scale of the map must decrease all the way to zero at the point infamously known as the south pole.  There is a nice video of a bunch of people who circled the globe around the South Pole in about a minute or less.  That makes my feat of going thru Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and  New Mexico in the same time frame look tame.  You can do all that at the Four Corners Monument.  Measuring your planets's latitude in the Southern hemisphere is a bit trickier.  There is no pole start like Polaris there.  You can use the Southern Cross, but it's a much harder task.  I didn't go far South too much and I sold my sextant several years back so I won't be trying again.  Now I can just use my iPhone.  It does work in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.  I compared the reading on my GPS application with the two GPS receivers used on the ship and it agreed out to 3 decimal points to the right. 

491

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 24, 2018, 01:24:30 AM »

Well, if you are really interested in equations you can see some that were made up by Maxwell, Gauss, Faraday, or Ampere.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_wave_equation.  These guys did all their work well over 100 years ago and the results of those equations are verified everyday.  They are an adequate description to just how electromagnetic waves behave.  How good is your calculus?  If you've had 4 or 5 semesters in college you are all set.  If you want something short and easy just see http://www.tpub.com/neets/book10/40j.htm.  All I know is what I learned working on radios for more than 50 years, and  my many semesters in college studying mathematics.  I was just trying to distill all that down in a short explanation of how radio waves can be influenced by weather and stay away from all the equations that 99% of the people won't understand.  Mostly radio waves always travel at the speed of light. Air has little to do with the actual propagation of electromagnetic waves as radios work just fine in outer space where there's no air.  Light (just another electromagnetic wave) propagates just fine in space.  I don't think that there's too much left that's unclear or unsubstantiated. If you need more then consider that radio waves can have effects on things in their path.  Just try putting a cat inside a microwave oven.  The cat will be exposed to microwaves and the results will be interesting.  I always had to watch my exposure to microwave radiation when working around radars.  The biggest risk was getting cataracts in my eyes.  People get sun burned.  That's just another form of electromagnetic radiation.  The risk is less on a cloudy day, but doesn't go away completely.  Of course radio waves will be effected by the rain and moisture in the air. Any radio system no matter what frequency can be influenced by the earth's atmosphere and can easily be noticed at times.  The sun can also have an effect as it excites the ionosphere.  The sun spots run in roughly 11 year cycles.  I was just talking with another amateur radio operator the other day and he was complaining about the sun spot cycle being at the low this year.  That fact has an effect on the propagation of HF radio signals.  All of this only indirectly relates to the subject matter of this thread. 

492

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moons - How?

« on: October 23, 2018, 09:45:10 PM »

You can't have gravity on the flat earth model because gravity means everything is pulled toward the center of mass of any object.  On a global earth that's no problem.  Everything is pulled toward the center.  On a flat earth those nearer to the edge would be pulled off in a slanted direction.  The closer to the center you are the more your vertical would be straight down.  The more you are out towards the edge the more your 'down' would be slanted towards the center of the earth.  The UA model would solve that little problem, but then brings up others. 

493

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moons - How?

« on: October 23, 2018, 08:28:49 PM »

In order for UA to work it would have to push on the back side of the earth, like wind in a sail.  The dark force field would then have to bend around the edges of the earth and push on the sun and moon to keep them accelerating at the same rate as the earth.  Otherwise the sun and moon would either fall to the earth's surface or slowly wander off in space.  That means that the dark force influences the earth, moon, and sun by giving these bodies a push, but also the earth (at least) effects the dark force because that dark force kind of bounces off the bottom of the earth and flows around it before coming back together on the top of the earth to then push on the moon and sun.  If the dark force energy didn't do that and just flowed thru the earth then it would act on everything on the top side of the earth and we would all be weightless.  The force of gravity has a well known equation for the imparted force.  It only depends on the mass and the distance apart any two objects are.  What about the dark energy force.  This force doesn't seem to be effected by the mass of an object, otherwise the earth would have a different acceleration rate than the sun or moon.  The amount of surface area doesn't seem to matter either, for the same reason.  If the FE model is to be believed then a simple equation should be put forth that can be tested and verified just like the force of gravity has been done so many times.

494

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Questions about flat earth

« on: October 23, 2018, 07:04:54 PM »

The amount of atmospheric refraction argument isn't valid.  Sailors use the North Star for navigation and it accurately can determine ones latitude on the global earth.  Yes, we will use a little correction for refraction, but it's minor.  The North Start slowly disappears over the horizon the further South you proceed.  If the refraction were to increase by an amount proportional to the distance South and if the mariners didn't correct for that, they would have been getting lost for years.  That didn't so the refraction doesn't change the farther South you go.

495

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Heliocentric Speed Change Problem

« on: October 23, 2018, 06:52:15 PM »

If you want to see all the effects of gravity just go to the 'International Gravity Formula'.  Everything is outlined there.  The effects of centrifugal force should be 0.03382 * Cos^2(Lat).  This is just the difference between what you would experience if the earth were NOT rotating and if the earth was, at the normal 1 rotation per 24 hours.   Of course the centrifugal force would just be a correction to the normal force of gravity because it's a force vector in exactly the opposite direction.  The heliocentric force due to acceleration is just the combination of the earths rotation on it's own axis and the rotation around the sun.  Unfortunately for the FET folks there are increasingly inexpensive MEMS devices out there that can actually measure accelerations on the surface of the earth and they come out with the expected values.  These devices are similar to those found inside your cell phones only better and more sensitive.  Right now the data from these devices can measure the accelerations due to the heliocentric speed changes but it takes a while.  The acceleration data is buried in a lot of noise and you have to take measurements over a period of time, then filter the data points to actually extract the readings you want.  This would mean you could easily take a device like this and take measurements at different latitudes.  If you got anywhere near the expected values than it would prove that the earth was both a sphere and rotating.  Of course there already is a network of instruments around the world that have already done this and they publish their results.  The force of gravity changes constantly due to the fact that the earth is not static.  Gravity is simply one center of mass attracting another.  If the location of that center of mass changes then the force would also change.  The network constantly measures the acceleration forces of gravity in many different locations around the world.  I didn't expect to see this mountain of information coming my way, but I took out and dusted off my own dynamics book that I used in college years ago.  All I have to do now is get myself back up to speed on the subject matter.
   

496

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 23, 2018, 05:53:51 PM »

With the flat earth model the moon doesn't orbit around the earth, it orbits above it.  The same goes for the sun.  It's not gravity that keeps everything on the earth, it's the constant acceleration of the earth.  The effects of throwing a baseball would be exactly the same with gravity or universal acceleration.  Of course if you threw the ball hard enough it would disappear off the earth's edge and I have no idea what would happen to it next. 

497

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 23, 2018, 05:29:31 PM »

I would then presume that the moon is in the field affected by UA.  Otherwise the distance between the earth and moon would change.  Now, if you are on the moon's surface facing the earth, and in the field, you would be weightless on the moon.  Both you and the moon would be in the same UA field and would experience the same acceleration and baring any outside force remain the same relative distance away.  You could then float above the surface of the moon.   Now, if the moon would have a little gravity then an astronaut could then actually walk on the surface.  But then if the moon had some gravity it would tend to crash down to the surface of the earth.  That could be prevented only if the UA force had a larger effect on the moon's mass than on the earth's mass.  Things are starting to get complicated.  You need some kind of equations that explain all the forces, just like you have with the gravity paradigm.

498

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 23, 2018, 04:48:46 PM »

I don't think anyone could jump into outer space as well.  That wasn't what the theory would say either.  If a dark force were accelerating the earth and was flowing around the edge and enveloping everyone and everything in a bubble, then that force should be felt on the surface of the earth.  Anything with mass would also be accelerated by the dark force at the same rate as the earth.   In that case, since everything and everyone is being accelerated at the same rate as the earth you wouldn't need the acceleration of the earth to keep you on the surface.  The only way the proposed theory would work would be if the earth was being accelerated by the dark force and everything else on the surface was not.  That way the earth would be the thing that would be accelerating up and transferring that force of acceleration to every mass on the surface.  Then everything would have weight and if you jumped up, you would come down again.  Of course, the dark force could flow around the edge of the earth and recombine somewhere above the surface of the earth and not produce any acceleration of anything on the surface.  The question then becomes, just where does that happen?  Would airplanes or high altitude balloons ever get into the flow of the dark force?  The dark force would also have to have the property that everything regardless of mass or surface area be accelerated at the same rate.  Otherwise the sun & moon would either fly off into space, or come crashing down to the earth's surface.  Either event wouldn't be nice.

499

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Amateur radio shows the earth is round

« on: October 23, 2018, 03:50:37 PM »

The propagation of radio waves doesn't require air at all.  Light is another form of electromagnetic radiation, just like radio waves, only of a much higher frequency.  Light travels thru the vacuum of space just fine.  It's mostly the water vapor that's present in the atmosphere that can both bend and/or reflect a radio wave.  That's how weather radar works.  On my last ship we had two different kinds of radars.  One used a much higher frequency than the other.  The lower frequency unit reached out farther and could track vessels 20 to 30 miles out.  The higher frequency radar was better at separating smaller vessels that were 3 to 5 miles out.  A large fleet of small fishing vessels could easily be seen as individual targets.  The disadvantage to the higher frequency radar was that rain from a thunderstorm would also show up and obscure other ships and boats.  Airline pilots used that fact to their advantage because they wanted to see where the rain and thunderstorms are so they could be avoided.  All radars just use pulses of radio waves.  The atmosphere isn't what propagates the signals, but can have an effect on them.  A HF, VHF, or UHF radio uses the very same electromagnetic waves as the radar, only of a lower frequency.  Microwave radios use a frequency similar to a radar.  Radars emit microwave radiation.   

500

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to disprove Universal Acceleration with your bare eyes:

« on: October 23, 2018, 03:34:41 PM »

If the flow of force wraps around the edge of the flat earth, it would be significant.  Such a force would have to be felt by everything in the bubble, just like you said.  That force has the power to accelerate the sun and moon at the same rate as the earth.  Aircraft don't seem to feel that force.  If they did you could fly off the surface of the earth and just cut back radically on your engines.  The only force you would need would be to keep you going horizontally against the friction of the air.  The dark energy force would then accelerate your aircraft upward and support you just like it does with the sun and moon.  High altitude balloons should also be supported.  You wouldn't need to depend on the buoyancy of the atmosphere anymore.   If the dark force somehow flows around the edges of the earth like water around a disk in a pipe, I would expect a lot of turbulence as the forces recombine at the top of the earth.  That turbulence would cause the sun and moon to bounce around quite a bit in their orbits.  Since that isn't observable then I would expect a very smooth flow of that energy thru the earth and to the sun & moon. That should also affect everyone anywhere.  You should be able to jump up and then just hang there because the dark force would support you.  So far I can't make that work.