1

Arts & Entertainment / Re: I began my fan fiction

« on: December 28, 2015, 05:30:23 AM »

The world has never been established as spherical.  The sun and moon are raised by magic!  Of course the planet is flat!

I got half way through the first chapter before I had to stop for my own sake.

Seriously?  The princess raises and lowers the sun each day and some pony thinks the planet rotates?  That's just bad writing.  Like I said, the MLP universe is more likely to be a plane than spherical by simple observations.  No scientist is going to even bother looking into the moon and sun's movements as they are governed by Princess Celestia.

There are globes present throughout the series such as the one in Golden Oaks Library, as well as a stained glass window right next to the throne that shows a spherical world and something that looks like Saturn. There are several references like this.

While nothing has been stated about rotation, it is heavily implied that in the general world view of Equestria, their planet is a sphere. It is accepted that Celestia and Luna control the movement of the two main luminaries, but there is also the fact that Rainbow Dash was dressed up like an astronaut during the most recent Nightmare Night episode. They have the concept of astronauts, of a globe world, etc. and yet it's clear they live on a plane. I am attempting to read between the lines here and write about this conspiracy which must exist in the canon world.

As you point out, by simple observations, it is clear that it is flat, but Celestia's word is taken as if it were the word of a goddess, and the pony race is a type of being that is easily conditioned. They are a herd animal and don't want to buck the trends presented to them if they have no compelling reason to question it.

One could just as easily argue (as many do) that simple observation reveals that we live on a flat earth, and yet most of us do not accept that as reality.

I think a big problem is that a lot of people here are not familiar with the series or its inconsistencies. This is why people are having a hard time understanding the fiction. I post it here out of courtesy because people were asking me to before.

2

Arts & Entertainment / I began my fan fiction

« on: December 27, 2015, 02:10:23 PM »

I began my flat earth themed fan fiction for MLP:

http://www.fimfiction.net/story/297266/horizon-rising

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hi everyone

« on: November 13, 2015, 02:02:43 PM »

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I'm working on a MY Little Pony fan fiction in which the main character (who ascended to a leadership role a couple of seasons ago) is being let in on the secret of their world being flat. A flat earth model makes a lot more sense than a globe model within the context of that fictional universe, but the show has globes in it, including one in a stained glass window next to the throne that's shown in the opening sequence.

This creates an interesting contradiction.

I think the show developers meant the window as a symbolic representation of the royal's power over their world, which makes it interesting. There's a surprising amount of depth between the lines of that show which is fun to explore with different writings. The G rating of the show keeps some canon storylines from going too deep of course but they're basically human equivalents.

The main character is now considered one of the four ruling elite whereas before she was simply a student of one of the others. As such, in my story, she's going to be let in on the secret that all of Coltpernicus' ideas were complete nonsense.

I'm having a good time writing it but even if it's just fan fiction I still want to portray flat earth in a respectful way. It might help some of my readers think outside the box a little bit even if it's not something they would seriously entertain for the real world.

I want to put as many credible sounding flat earth arguments into the story as I can without making it too dry.

I don't like the idea of universal acceleration because to be a little blunt about it, that sounds stupid to me.

I think that if the flat earth model is correct, then I would go with a motionless earth. The main problem with gravity is that if it's true as science now understands it, it would crush anything the size of the earth into a ball. So a flat earth has to either have no gravity (but something to account for the directionality of the sinking/rising) or a gravity with different properties than is currently understood.

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hi everyone

« on: November 12, 2015, 08:44:18 PM »

Hello I am almost afraid to ask any questions. I joined another flat earth forum and asked this question as my first post and was immediately banned. I want to write a story with the flat earth model in it and portray it fairly and accurately as much as possible. I am on the fence about whether it's true in the real world or not to be honest, but I am open minded and willing to learn about it.

Please don't instaban me.

Anyway here is my question.

If in the flat earth model, there is no gravity, how do you account for the directional nature of up and down?

If things sink because they are denser than the medium around them or rise because they are less dense, what determines the directionality of the sinking and rising without gravity? What makes up "up" and why is down in the direction of the earth?

In the globe model, this is accounted for by gravity, but in the flat earth model, what causes up and down to be what they are?

I am looking forward to a better and deeper understanding of the flat earth model. I'm not here to debate, merely to understand. Thank you.

You won't get insta-banned. Not here. Hell, they let ME stay, and I'm a round-earther who jousts with these guys on a daily basis

The concept of gravity is widely debated here. Some assert there is a universal acceleration model of the flat-earth theory, that the earth-disc is RISING through space at an accelerating rate, which could account for the illusion of gravity.

Others will assert that gravity does exist, but isn't as an exact science or theory as we have been led to believe.

The point of my post is two-fold. One as a welcome, the other as a warning that the answer you seek might be more complicated than you're bargaining for.

I highly encourage you to look around this forum and get an idea of what 'flat-earth' theory entails. The reality of the situation is that there are a lot of 'unknowns' and varying theories out there. There isn't anything concrete.

Good luck!

Thanks for the reply. I've gotten the impression that there are many different flat earth models, and some of them are more robust than others.

I have always been a big fan of mainstream science but I feel like it's important to at least entertain the possibility that the standard model might not be correct.

I still like the globe model better on an emotional level if only because I like the idea of a big beautiful universe full of stars and planets and galaxies, etc. a lot better than a relatively tiny universe with only one world.

However, I want to understand on a human level where the flat earthers are coming from and also understand various aspects of flat earth theory much better than I do now.

I don't want to unfairly represent it if I talk about the topic whether I agree or disagree.

5

Flat Earth Theory / Hi everyone

« on: November 12, 2015, 06:34:47 PM »

Hello I am almost afraid to ask any questions. I joined another flat earth forum and asked this question as my first post and was immediately banned. I want to write a story with the flat earth model in it and portray it fairly and accurately as much as possible. I am on the fence about whether it's true in the real world or not to be honest, but I am open minded and willing to learn about it.

Please don't instaban me.

Anyway here is my question.

If in the flat earth model, there is no gravity, how do you account for the directional nature of up and down?

If things sink because they are denser than the medium around them or rise because they are less dense, what determines the directionality of the sinking and rising without gravity? What makes up "up" and why is down in the direction of the earth?

In the globe model, this is accounted for by gravity, but in the flat earth model, what causes up and down to be what they are?

I am looking forward to a better and deeper understanding of the flat earth model. I'm not here to debate, merely to understand. Thank you.