Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Ah most excellent so the earth has been accelerating at a constant 9.8 m/ss for a number of years.
Now in FE does the speed of light remain constant?
Does the formula E=mc^2 hold true.
of course
Yes please that would be perfect a few things first as to do this properly we need to agree on certain things OKIn the UA model, how do you account for falling objects falling at different speeds based on mass and drag? It seems to me that if the ground was racing up to meet them mass/drag would be irrelevant.
The same reason as described in RET/Gravity. why wouldnt air/drag affect an object? both the air, ground and object all have an initial velocity moving upward. so of course the object coming back down would see the same effects. if you did the same test in a vacuum then yes, the results will be same, which is obvious in either RET or UA
lets argue about UA as described by FET, not someone's personal opinion about what they think UA describes.
Started reading your works on DE. That’s a great start and a hell of a lot of work. It’s going to take some time to get through it you seem to have a great way of explaining some of the details that are missing with the standard FE model. How’s this being received?Didn’t skim read article. Read it and understand that time will alter ever so slightly with a change in altitude due to the variation of the gravitational effect. We know that time and gravity are indeed linked the only constant in the universe is the speed of light.
The proof of local time was very welll described in one of Stephen Hawkings lectures that I read. I can put it here if you like it’s simple enough.
All I asked is how this fits in with a genuine interest in the UA model of the universe I seek an understanding of the thought process and the interaction between UA and CG
So I take mild offence at the accusations of snide comments.
If you have nothing constructive to say say nothing at all is what my good old(now dead) dad used to say.Pete literally pointed out how that had already been pointed out in this thread. Don't act like you care about an answer when you would rather post to just make a snide comment rather than skim-read a single thread.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10036.msg158273#msg158273
Oh OK could you help me get a better understanding of your understanding of general relativity I have my own preconceived ideas that may of course be completely wrong!Erm not quite understanding this we perceive the acceleration while on Earth so is the Earth actually accelerating or not?Depends on the observer/frame of reference. Special Relativity is not always intuitive.
Didn’t skim read article. Read it and understand that time will alter ever so slightly with a change in altitude due to the variation of the gravitational effect. We know that time and gravity are indeed linked the only constant in the universe is the speed of light.Pete literally pointed out how that had already been pointed out in this thread. Don't act like you care about an answer when you would rather post to just make a snide comment rather than skim-read a single thread.Wow cool article.the value varies. See http://www.npl.co.uk/news/transportable-optical-clock-used-to-measure-gravitation-for-the-first-timeAnd what happens when like my car we run out of horse power? And we reach our final speed? Really concerned about that.You cannot logically consider this situation from a classical mechanics point of view. You have to account for Special Relativity and the fact that we perceive an acceleration of 9.81ms^-2 while on the Earth or immediately above it.
Really interesting that you can use a very very accurate clock to measure the difference in gravity resolving with a change in height.
Erm how does this fit in with UA I thought the point was that the whole of our Flat Earth was perceived to be accelerating uniformly at 9.81 m/ss if there is a change with altitude how does this even work!
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=10036.msg158273#msg158273
Wow cool article.the value varies. See http://www.npl.co.uk/news/transportable-optical-clock-used-to-measure-gravitation-for-the-first-timeAnd what happens when like my car we run out of horse power? And we reach our final speed? Really concerned about that.You cannot logically consider this situation from a classical mechanics point of view. You have to account for Special Relativity and the fact that we perceive an acceleration of 9.81ms^-2 while on the Earth or immediately above it.
Erm not quite understanding this we perceive the acceleration while on Earth so is the Earth actually accelerating or not?And what happens when like my car we run out of horse power? And we reach our final speed? Really concerned about that.You cannot logically consider this situation from a classical mechanics point of view. You have to account for Special Relativity and the fact that we perceive an acceleration of 9.81ms^-2 while on the Earth or immediately above it.
Nope no issues here at all just seeking to further understand UA! So we get out weight from a constant acceleration got that bit and yup it works really well.Hi Pete sorry for jumping in on this discussion.That's pretty much it. Generally speaking, everything in the Flat Earth Model is affected by gravitation, much like it would in the round Earth model. The main difference is that it's a relatively weak force. While the brunt of the gravity we perceive comes from UA, precise measurements will reveal slight variances which are currently understood to be caused mainly by CG.
I've had a read of the FAQ and am struggling to understand UA and CG. Is there some kind of unification of these two theories or are they two separate things?
The way it seems to me is that we stick on this disk as we are accelerating at a constant velocity of 9.81 ms2 which gives us 1g. the rest of the universe is doing what at this time? I'm guessing accelerating with us. CG is the other kind of gravity that holds the rest of the universe together?CG from what I can read, isn't really defined.Spherical, you are essentially taking an issue with the fact that the Flat Earth Theory is a work in progress, and that there are still many unknowns. This, of course, is only normal in the pursuit of truth. We don't have all the answers, but an incomplete answer is vastly preferable to an incorrect one.
Hi I hope you can help as you seem to be well versed in FE gravity. I’m new to this whole thing and studied Newtonian physics for a while for working out trajectories and various other things.
Now what about the question of "Universal Acceleration versus Newton's Law of gravitation?"
what specifically are you asking?
you have to remember that all laws/math that you are using to try and prove a round earth were all developed based on the same earth that we are claiming to be flat. a lot of the math would be the same, but the fact the math was done based on an assumed "round" earth is where some errors can occur.
Hi Pete sorry for jumping in on this discussion.Is there anything in FE to account for this difference when using any FE model?Again, CG. The correlation between latitude and measured discrepancies in gravity does not necessarily imply a causal relationship.
Hi folks new here and struggling to get a handle on this UA thing.The force of Gravity would change due to distance and due to other massive objects, while UA would always stay the same.UA alone, perhaps, but the changes in perceived gravity (not to be confused with gravitation) are down to Celestial Gravitation, and not UA.