421

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 15, 2018, 07:16:45 PM »

I could see that a single measurement point of one of the gravimeters could get some kind of an anomalous reading that couldn't be accounted for.  With all the measurement labs out there (worldwide) making frequent measurements, any variations in readings would be seen and any small disturbances in the earths gravity due to transient events would be seen.  No it's just not possible to dismiss the theory of gravity for such a minor reason.  Besides, the differences in the readings between spaced out gravimeters are NOT slight for an instrument that can measure the force down to a millionth of a millionth.   If you hit me with a grain of rice, I might not even feel it.  I believe that if a gnat got hit with that same grain of rice the it would be knocked silly or killed.  You have to keep everything in perspective.

I believe that the idea to avoid gravity in the FET paradigm is to avoid another problem.  If the earth were flat and you had gravity then a plum bob wouldn't be at right angles to the earth anywhere except at the North Pole.  The further out you got, the more the bob would be out of level.  All the other problems are flowing from the first flat earth assumption.  Like the old saying 'what a tangled web we weave when we first try to deceive'. 

422

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 15, 2018, 06:45:27 PM »

Ok, I went off the deep end and answered too quickly.  Let's try this;  Forget gravity altogether. FET doesn't allow gravitational effects of the earth itself anyway.  The measurements made were of the actual acceleration due to UA, not gravity.  Of course all the variables have been accounted for and everything was done in a laboratory setting. The problem is that these laboratories are located all over the world and not just at the poles.  Under the UA theory you can't tolerate too much of any variance in acceleration world wide or the earth would fold in on itself.  Of course that isn't what has been measured.  If you want to play the 'dark matter' card then that can be measured as well.  Anything that has the power to accelerate a mass can be measured.  I don't think anyone has seen any anomalous effects in this regard.

423

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 15, 2018, 06:24:11 PM »

No one said that all the variables were accounted for in gnome experiment.  It was just a promotional thing for Kern.  What isn't a promotional thing is all the measurements (world wide) made in a laboratory by scientists with all the variables accounted for down to a gnat's ass.  The absolute gravimeters used have been constructed in various ways by engineers and scientists from countless countries.  Many of those instruments were brought to a common location and their readings compared.  Differences were in the category of a few millionths of a millionth.  How much closer do you want to get?  If you don't believe these facts please tell us all the variables you need accounting for, the standards and the desired accuracy you need.  My guess is that the existing gravimeters already meet those specifications and the data is available.  Would it help if you could personally witness an actual measurement.  If that wouldn't help please tell us what would.

424

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 15, 2018, 05:32:46 PM »

A relative or absolute gravimeter really doesn't matter.  In the worst case the measurements obtained are down in the millionths category of whatever measurement units you happen to be talking about.  There are gravimeters used on ships and on aircraft.  All this equipment has been designed and used by scientists and engineers and all the possible corrections have been accounted for.  The oil companies use this equipment in their prospecting efforts along with the mining companies.  If the technology didn't work they wouldn't be buying this equipment.  Now with the new MEMS technology I would expect to see some useful equipment available in you iPhone sometime in the future.  I don't know what it would be used for, however.  A story I saw was that a company had a absolute gravimeter so sensitive that they could tell when the snow was removed off the roof of the building they were in.  The bottom line is everything is down to a 'gnats ass' and all you are arguing about is how many pimples are on that ass.  The Kern scale experiment was a promotional thing and not a real scientific experiment.  That doesn't mean that the results are not valid.  The results are just are not anywhere as accurate as they could be if the proper equipment was brought to the scene. Many absolute gravimeters (from many countries) were brought together at a single location and the results compared.  The arguments were down to a millionth of a millionth.  These gravimeters are spread out all over the world and are producing readings on a regular basis.  No matter what UA, is not a viable argument unless it can be reworked to explain all the well documented results from scientists from countless countries that have measured a variation in the earth's gravity and can be explained by the rotating round earth paradigm. 

425

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 15, 2018, 03:28:31 AM »

I really believe that everything is well understood.  There are those who just need to stir the pot and generate more posts.  The underlying objective is to NOT understand and let the 'sheeple' do the explaining.  As the old saying goes:  'A lion never looses sleep over the opinions of a sheep'

426

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 15, 2018, 02:39:48 AM »

The force that holds back all the waters is gravity.  Of course you don't have to believe in gravity. You could start building an arc.  I really don't know how to explain it any better.  Buy yourself a nice globe and study it for a couple of hours and maybe you will understand.

427

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 15, 2018, 01:47:02 AM »

I agree the 191 mile bulge is confusing and the term should be banned.  Think of it this way.  Take a perfect sphere with nothing on it.  Then cut it in half.  Then the bulge would be 3959 miles.  If you cut off just the top 3 quarters, then the bulge would be 2969 miles.  You can see that you can keep cutting the sphere into small and smaller sections.   It still would be hard to see any physical curvature of the earth, but you could still measure it indirectly.  That's the real problem.  On land in rolling hills or in the desert the average terrain may actually be mostly flat with only a curvature, on average.  Even at sea a bubble level would always be centered because vertical is always towards the center of the earth.  Those vertical lines would not be parallel. It's all confusing because man is so small and the earth is so large.  When you start observing the sun, moon, and stars you can start getting an appreciation to the true spherical nature of the earth.  Those that just go to work, watch TV, then go to sleep will never have any reason to care, one way or another, about the shape of the earth.     

428

Flat Earth Community / Re: Euler Spiral Map

« on: November 14, 2018, 10:35:33 PM »

Now just take that map, apply it to the Flat Earth paradigm and get it so we can use it for celestial navigation.  That would be the 'acid test'.  Or maybe you could take a flat earth map and do a 'reverse Euler' spiral and make it into a globe map.  Kind of like a spherical cow.  Could that be a useful 'proof' of the FET paradigm?

429

Flat Earth Community / Re: Can Globe believers prove Earth has curvature by their own Curvature Charts?

« on: November 14, 2018, 10:22:15 PM »

Let's say that it rained for 400 days and 400 nights.  Everyone had to leave their homes because the earth's dry land was totally underwater, everywhere.  We were all in a 'water-world' to the max.  Now, since the earth's surface is totally covered by water, how would you measure the distance to the center of the earth?  It would be from sea level to the center of the earth.  Since the water seeks the gravity at the center of the earth that distance would be constant everywhere, and would be measured to the water's surface.  Now, start taking all the water away.  First the highest parts of the earth's surface would appear out of the seas, like the tip of Mt Everest.  Slowly the rest of the land starts to rise out of the sea.  Australia would come back slowly.  Visualize that scenario and think about what would happen between point A and B on the diagram as the water very slowly drains off and the land slowly starts to appear out of the sea again.

430

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 10:05:49 PM »

Let’s say you take a friendly Gnome to the South Pole and weigh him.  You get the reading of 309.82 grams.  Now you are a total skeptic and are worried about the air pressure altering the real reading, so you wave your magic wand and suck out all the air in the atmosphere.  Now the effects of buoyancy of the air go away and the friendly Gnome now only weighs 309.74 grams. You are not measuring the Gnome against a vacuum anyway, only against the earth’s gravity and a small variation in atmospheric pressure.   You can do all the ‘rope-a-doping’ you want, but the observed facts will remain the same.  The biggest effects on the weight of the Gnome will be the uneven force of gravity on the earth.  Atmospheric effects are negligible and is like the water level effects of ‘pissing in a pool’.   Of course if you don’t believe in the earth’s gravity the whole thing is moot and you have to come up with another explanation for the well documented and observed measurements. 

431

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 07:51:16 PM »

Probably some consumer group got mad and thought that they were being screwed somewhere along the line so the government had to step in an establish a standard that could be enforced. That's one of the reasons the Somigliana Formula is important and is used by people to compensate their equipment for a change in latitude.   

All the 'confusion' perpetrated by an 'unknown' entity on here can really stir the pot and get the posts flying.  Do you suppose that is really an accident?
   

432

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 07:32:35 PM »

Besides that, if the earth were under a constant acceleration (UA) Kern wouldn't have to compensate their equipment for different locations.  I'm thinking that this isn't another government conspiracy.  I think the bigger worry would be that when I buy the next batch of unobtainium at the hardware store I'll have to watch that the salesman doesn't have his thumb on the scale.

433

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 07:21:00 PM »

There is some confusion here.  The 4 micrograms difference was just my estimation of the compensation needed due to the changes of atmospheric pressures.  The 6% variation in weights were due to the differences in the gravitational attraction of the standardized mass of the Gnome.  Probably 6% is a bit too high, it's probably closer to 5%, but it's still significant and still implies that the earth is not under a worldwide constant acceleration of 9.81 meters per second squared.  It also implies that the earth is not perfectly spherical and was the whole idea behind the experiment in the first place. 

434

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 07:01:15 PM »

The link you gave was for Arlyn Scales.  Of course, the Gnome was measured with a Kern scale.  The superior Kern scales can be compensated for your local conditions either at the factory before your item is shipped, or you can do it yourself.  All of that is irrelevant in this case anyway.  You are confusing the idea of mass and weight.  A mass standard is universal, at least on the planet earth, and is the resistance of that mass to being accelerated by a force.  There is an international standard for mass here on the earth.  Weight on the other hand is a measurement of the gravitational force on a given mass by the mass of the earth (usually).  The Kern scales can be compensated for your individual location before it’s shipped.  The whole idea of the Gnome exercise would be to explain that the earth’s gravitational force is different in different locations and is the reason that Kern should be paid extra to compensate your precision scale to your exact location.  Mass is much more difficult to measure than is weight.  If you have a compensated scale, then your weight and mass should be the same anywhere you measure it.  Shocking.

435

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 14, 2018, 03:28:13 PM »

I did some quick calculations.  I SWAGed it (Scientific Wild Ass Guess) and said that the volume of the Gnome was about 61.6 cm cubed.  I could have had Archeimedes give it a bath, but he isn't around anymore.  That means that the difference in weight due to the buoyancy of air at different densities due to change in atmospheric pressure would be about 4 millionths of a gram.  You wouldn't be able to see it on the Kern scale as good as it is.  Now the weight difference due to the measured difference in gravity at the poles and at the equator is a different story.  You can also apply the Somigliana equation to compensate for the effect of centrifugal force at different latitudes and you still come out with around a half percent difference in weight between the poles and the equator.  That's close to the measured difference in the weight observed in the traveling Gnome.  I suppose you could try to say that the flat earth is tumbling, but that doesn't even work.  As much as I hate to do it I'll give Tom a huge box of ammunition with the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow.  I just thought that it applies to this situation.   

436

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 10:35:27 PM »

Maybe I can lend you some kryptonite.
The problems with a flat earth are even worse that that.  If you have UA, then you also have to find a way of accelerating the sun and moon as well.  They also need to be rotating which will require another energy source to keep everything moving in a circle (or maybe a pole with a cable).  That is, unless you want to forget Newton altogether.     

437

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 10:23:02 PM »

Yea, my predictions would be a variation in the micro-grams category, assuming you used a kg of gold as your weight.  Where did you say you lived?

438

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Free Will disproved

« on: November 13, 2018, 08:53:51 PM »

I believe that your thoughts are like the software running in a computer.  It would be nice to take all my thoughts and load them into a new body because the one I'm in is old and has been in way too many wrecks.  Maybe someday that will be possible.  You probably do have 'free will' but everything is probabilistic.  Just because you want to do something doesn't guarantee that it will immediately happen.  However, if you keep trying the odds will favor your eventual success.  You probably know about Tom Campbell and 'My Big Toe'.  The older I get the more I can actually believe that we are just avatars in a video game being played by unknown entities.  That thought doesn't shock me too much and means that everything will get more interesting later on. 

439

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 06:53:54 PM »

You are indeed 100% correct.  An object's mass (it's resistance to acceleration) wouldn't change (my bad).  It's weight, the force of attraction between 2 masses would change in this case.  If you believe in the universal law of gravitation you would expect an object of any mass to weigh a bit more at the earth's poles because they are just a bit closer to the center of the earth's mass.  That was the whole idea of the original Clairaut experiment to show that the earth's shape wasn't quite a perfect sphere.  Modern day equipment has been used to verify that theory countless times.   

440

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Increased gravity at the poles?

« on: November 13, 2018, 03:22:03 PM »

Take a look at the Kern Precision Scales website.  They show the Gnome and the precision scale in a nice case.  These folks make scales for a living and you can be sure that the experiment left very little to chance.  They ship scales from scientist to scientist worldwide.  The whole idea was to show the differences of gravity due to the location on the earth.  My quick, back of the envelope, calculations of the differences of weight due to changes in atmospheric pressures and temperatures at the various places in the world would be very, very small.  Forget everything about the weather corrections.  Think the differences in weight (mass) due to the variations in the gravity on the earth.  Clairaut is probably rolling over in glee as the results come in.