I just read the Wiki entry for Universal Acceleration and have several questions but I will post them one at a time.
The TFES Wiki entry states:
"Universal Acceleration (UA) is a theory of gravity in the Flat Earth Model. UA asserts that the Earth is accelerating 'upward' at a constant rate of 9.8m/s^2.
This produces the effect commonly referred to as "gravity".
The traditional theory of gravitation (e.g. Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation, General Theory of Relativity, etc) is incompatible with the Flat Earth Model because it requires a large, spherical mass pulling objects uniformly toward its center. "Further down it states:
The phenomenon we observe everyday when falling is currently substantiated in modern physics by what is called "The Equivalence Principle".The Equivalence Principle is part of General Relativity which the author, at the top of the page, says is incompatible with the flat earth model.
Is the author simply picking those parts of General Relativity he or she feels are valid for his purposes, and ignoring the rest or is the author unaware that General Relativity includes the Equivalence Principle?
The following is from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principleIn the theory of general relativity, the equivalence principle is any of several related concepts dealing with the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass, and to Albert Einstein's observation that the gravitational "force" as experienced locally while standing on a massive body (such as the Earth) is the same as the pseudo-force experienced by an observer in a non-inertial (accelerated) frame of reference.
As the saying goes: You can't have it both ways.
How can the author say that General Relativity does not apply to the flat earth but pulls a part of General Relativity out to prove the validity of his or hers idea of Universal Acceleration being what earth's gravity really is?
Are we to simply ignore gross errors like this in the flat earth idea?
If so, how convenient for the flat earthers who insist upon every being absolutely accurate when present with statements disproving the flat earth.
Make even on error of typo and they will be all over you.
And - once again, why is there no agreed upon map of the flat earth. If we just date the flat earth idea from 1865 Parallax/Rowbotham first published "ZETETIC ASTRONOMY EARTH NOT A GLOBE!" that's 153 years for the flat earthers to get their act together and have a map of the flat earth as well as answers to such basic question such as:
What is the diameter of the flat earth - ice barrier to ice barrier, through the North Pole?
What are meteors and how do you account for meteorites?
Those are just a few of the questions which flat earthers should be able to answer these 153 years after Rowbotham but don't seem to be able to.
If FEs truly believe the earth is flat, 153 years is surely enough time for them to get together and begin to record agreed upon "facts" about the flat earth such as the diameter of the flat earth; what holds the sun and moon up, what process cause the luminosity of the sun,etc.